The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-10-04 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2004 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:33 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Staff Present Carol Asleson Jami Morris, Associate Planner Dawn Smith Erin Daley, Planner Brian Krueger Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Scott Hedglin Visitors Present Bryan Angove Catherine Koenen Lowell Springer ITEM 2. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2004 Chairperson Dawn Smith called for corrections or additions to the minutes of October 27, 2004. MOTION: Mr. Krueger moved, Ms. Asleson seconded, to approve the minutes as presented. The motion carried 4-0. ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW A. Days Inn Addition Exterior Materials Mods SP/COA #Z-03084 (Daley) 1321 North 7th Avenue * A request for changes to approved exterior materials. Associate Planner Jami Morris joined the DRB. Planner Erin Daley presented the Staff Report noting there had been a misunderstanding between the Planning Office and the owner/applicant for the Days Inn Addition. She stated the owner, Mr. Brutger, had submitted proposals for correcting the exterior materials. Planner Morris stated the Planning Director was to make a decision and had requested the DRB make suggestions. Planner Daley stated the applicant had proposed a lighter colored EFIS band. Chairperson Smith asked which materials had been originally approved. Planner Morris responded the original requirements were to stay in keeping with the existing structure, but final elevations were not submitted with the Final Site Plan. Chairperson Smith asked what excuse the applicant/owner had for not using the brick design originally approved for the structure. Planner Morris responded the applicant’s excuse was that the brick was 20 years old, unavailable, and not to his liking anyway. Mr. Krueger stated he thought, in light of reading the Staff Report guidelines, at a minimum the applicant should break up the large expanse of EFIS on the south façade. He stated that not having a permanent material (brick) was less important. He stated he liked the applicant’s new proposed elevations. Ms. Asleson stated the applicant would replace the shingles at some point and asked if the colors were supposed to be matching. Planner Daley responded they were supposed to be matching colors, and they were, but the rendering was inaccurate. Ms. Asleson stated that if the brick was too exorbitant to be put back in, they had made a mistake. She stated she would go along with what the Planning Department was suggesting. Mr. Hedglin stated the owner/applicant made the mistake and needed to repair the project despite the cost. He stated there was no reason why the jams and the head couldn’t be dressed up fairly inexpensively and suggested sun shades on the south façade. He stated the rooftop equipment was glaring down over the edge of the roof and he wondered if the applicant took any of the DRB or Staff comments seriously. Chairperson Smith stated she thought the two colors on the new addition were great. She stated she would support any kind of alterations to the windows (i.e. detail around them). She suggested raising the level of the EFIS/wainscot. She suggested doing the whole building the correct way. She stated she supported the applicant’s new proposed elevations and she would support any variation of them as long as they had as much detail. Planner Daley asked if the DRB would like to see the air conditioners colored to mask the façades appearance. The DRB responded it would probably only bring them out more. B. Magic Diamond Too FSP #Z-04209 (Morris) 2625 West Main Street * A Final Site Plan Application for a Conditional Use Permit with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a new gaming parlor with on-site sales and consumption of alcohol and related site improvements. The Design Review Board forwarded a favorable recommendation of the project to the City Commission with the stipulation that the applicant provide a copy of the proposed Final Site Plan to the Board for final review and approval. Lowell Springer, Brian Angove, and Catherine Koenen joined the DRB. Associate Planner Jami Morris presented the Staff Report noting the applicant had submitted the FSP and introduced the color renderings from the initial DRB review as well as the newly submitted color renderings. Mr. Springer presented examples of the cultured stone proposed for the structure. He stated the applicant was willing to follow DRB recommendations and the City Commission had basically given the DRB final say in the matter. Planner Morris stated the FSP needed to be approved for three conditions, the mature willow trees in their proposed locations (per a boundary re-alignment), the use of cultured stone instead of real stone for the wainscot, and the proposed colors. Planner Morris stated the boundary re-alignment and proposed car wash were the impetus for Town Pump to remove the condition of approval regarding the existing willow trees to allow for a larger car wash on the adjoining lot, but there would be a requirement from City Commission to plant four, 3- inch caliper trees in place of the existing willow trees. Mr. Hedglin stated there seemed to be a conflict with the parking and the trash enclosure. Ms. Koenen responded that the City foresaw no difficulties as the garbage would be removed during hours when the businesses were closed. Mr. Hedglin stated he could see it being difficult to pull out of the parallel parking stalls because of the distance between the parallel stalls and the parking stalls across from them. He stated he would support the elimination of the three parallel parking stalls and the replacement of those stalls with vegetation. Planner Morris responded the applicant could remove the parallel stalls, but it would require a deviation from the parking requirements. Mr. Hedglin and Mr. Springer suggested several locations where the parking could be moved or the drive aisle could be narrowed and the requirements for parking and landscaping would still be met. Mr. Hedglin stated he liked the building better with a shallower pitched roof, especially if there was a metallic color proposed for the roof of the structure. He stated he appreciated the fact that the applicant had looked at natural stone for the elevations, but if the cultured stone was better for the outside of the building, he would support it. Mr. Krueger stated he liked the new elevations, the 6:12 roof balanced the wide fascia better, but he would prefer a natural stone on the façade, and he would recommend the roof color be similar to what was suggested in the elevations (burgundy). Ms. Asleson stated she liked the low-gloss finish for the roof instead of the metallic copper color. She stated she had a softer spot for natural stone, but was willing to support cultured stone. She stated she did not support the removal of the mature willow trees. She asked to see the alternative sign designs. Mr. Angove presented color renderings of the proposed signs. Ms. Asleson stated she preferred the new sign colors and design than what was currently depicted. Chairperson Smith stated she preferred the stone over brick and would support the use of the cultured stone. She stated the modified proposal looked less naughty and dark. She stated she would not support the metallic, sparkle finish for the roof as it would detract from the rest of the structure. She stated the trees on the site were important because that side of Main Street was barren of vegetation and suggested the modification of the property boundaries to accommodate the existing trees. MOTION: Ms. Asleson moved, Mr. Krueger seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval for Magic Diamond Too FSP #Z-04209 to the City Commission with Staff Conditions and the addition of two conditions; 1) either real or cultured stone for the wainscot, and 2) keep condition #13 to ensure the existing mature willow trees are not removed. ITEM 4. F.Y.I. A. * Enclosed are the U.D.O. text amendments pertinent to the DRB. Please review and be prepared to discuss the document on the December 8, 2004 meeting of the DRB. ITEM 5. PUBLIC COMMENT – (15 – 20 minutes) {Limited to any public matter, within the jurisdiction of the Design Review Board, not on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} There was no public available for comment. ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m. ________________________________ Dawn Smith, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board