Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-11-03 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 2003 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Vice Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Staff Present Dawn Smith Susan Kozub, Assistant Planner Mel Howe Candace Honatke, Assistant Planner Jim Raznoff Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Carol Asleson Bill Hanson Randy Carpenter Visitors Present Don Bachman Joe Mangiantini Erik Nelson Marian Steffes Joyce Benjamin Norman Benjamin Jesse Sobrepena Ron Stafford Ed Sondeno Brian Caldwell Mary Ackerman ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 2003 Vice Chairperson Smith called for corrections or additions to the minutes. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved, Mr. Carpenter seconded, to approve the minutes of January 14, 2003 as presented. Motion carried 5-0. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF JANUARY 28, 2003 Vice Chairperson Smith called for corrections or additions to the minutes. MOTION: Mr. Raznoff moved, Ms. Asleson seconded, to approve the minutes of January 14, 2003 as presented. Motion carried 5-0. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW A. Gallatin Veterinary Hospital MiSP/COA #Z-03004 (Honatke) 808 Stoneridge Drive * A Minor Site Plan Application with Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a new 5,392 square foot animal veterinary hospital with a 1,455 square foot apartment on the second level and related site improvements. Jesse Sobrepena and Ron Stafford joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Candace Honatke presented the staff report. Mr. Sobrepena stated the owners wanted the proposed building to blend with the surrounding architecture. Mr. Hanson asked if there was any problem with the overall depth of the proposal. Planner Honatke responded the DRC had found no problems with the project as it was proposed. Mr. Hanson expressed concern that the future development of adjoining properties would leave gaps due to the large side-yard setbacks. Planner Honatke stated Staff was more concerned that the proposed landscaping was insufficient and made the project seem empty. Ms. Asleson asked if there were many “escapees” from the existing veterinary clinic. Mr. Stafford stated there were rarely any “escapees”. Vice Chairperson Smith asked if the proposal had the correct number of parking spaces. Planner Honatke stated the number of spaces meets the code with a possibility of extra spaces. Mr. Hanson stated that, overall, he was supportive of the project. He stated the site seemed to have elbow room, but he suggested, with future development in mind, moving the building further to the east. Mr. Howe and Mr. Raznoff stated they supported the project with Staff conditions. Ms. Asleson stated one of the elevations was stark and bland. She stated that, for the most part, she supported the project with Staff conditions. She asked if there could be more windows in the kennel section of the structure and noted the view from 19th Avenue would not be very pleasant. Planner Honatke stated the entrance was easily seen from the 19th Avenue access to the development and the corridor requirements, regarding the elevations, were well met. Ms. Asleson suggested a fence could be constructed around the structure for the unlikely occurrence of an animal escape. Vice Chairperson Smith responded the PUD guidelines may not allow a fence. Mr. Carpenter stated he supported the project with Staff conditions, but thought the parking spaces should be reduced. Vice Chairperson Smith stated she liked the style of the building in relation to existing buildings in the area. She noted she was in favor of the application, and supported Staff’s conditions. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved, Mr. Howe seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval for Gallatin Veterinary Hospital MiSP/COA #Z-03004 to the City Commission with conditions as outlined by Staff. Motion carried 6-0. B. Sourdough Place Concept PUD #Z-03009 (Kozub) Southeast corner of Kagy Boulevard and Sourdough Road * A Concept Planned Unit Development Application to allow the construction of nine residential units on approximately 1.6 acres, including two single household residential units, four town homes, and three cottage style units and related site improvements. Brian Caldwell and Erik Nelson joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Susan Kozub presented the staff report. She noted Staff would not support the 25 foot setback reduction along Sourdough Road as Sourdough Road is a minor arterial street. Mr. Nelson stated the applicant tried to address concerns from the Informal Review. He noted the three typologies; cottage, town home, and single household residence, and the use of regional materials and architecture. He stated he proposes the northern slope as garden spots and the courtyard as barbecue areas. He stated the hillside homes were nestled into the slope. He stated the concept of a sculpture park or native plant park to the north of the property was being considered. Mr. Caldwell stated that, in general, the proposal was meant to be in keeping with the Bozeman 2020 plan. Vice Chairperson Smith noted the DRB would make recommendations based on the conceptual proposal, and then would see the proposal again when a formal proposal was submitted. Mr. Carpenter asked if grading would be done on the site. Mr. Nelson stated there would be hardly any grading, and there was an almost perfect balance of filling and grading at the current stage. Mr. Caldwell stated a series of culverts would be used for storm water retention, similar to what the Food Co-op used. Planner Kozub stated that even though there was a grade change, the property was not identified by the new ridgeline protection section of the subdivision regulations. Mr. Caldwell stated the new design created a “sense of place” that seemed lacking in the proposal as it was first reviewed in the informal stage. Ms. Asleson asked how the development, with nine units, matched the existing surroundings. Mr. Nelson responded there was no other location better suited to create density than the crossroads of these two major streets. Mr. Caldwell stated the conjunction and massing of the project would be in keeping with the rhythm of how buildings occurred farther down the street. He stated the project design tried to maintain the set-up of the corridor of the street. Ms. Asleson asked if the landscaping would be dense. Mr. Caldwell stated they had been consulting landscaping design professionals to design the landscape plan. Mr. Raznoff stated the proposal contained nine units, but he did not see any indication of affordable housing. Planner Kozub stated Staff was looking for larger projects, greater than 10 acres, to incorporate affordable housing. Mr. Caldwell stated the appraised value of the project would not adversely affect the value of adjoining property. Mr. Hanson asked how the calculations for the open space requirement for this project were done. He stated there very little space was allotted for private outdoor space. Planner Kozub stated that when submitting these PUDs concurrently, there are choices in how open space could be calculated. Mr. Caldwell stated the townhouses would not necessarily have to have such large footprints, which could provide more usable outdoor space. Mr. Hanson asked about the garden plots on the northern slope. Mr. Nelson stated the 10 ft. by 20 ft. areas on the landscaped terraces were slightly elevated, specifically for garden plots. Vice Chairperson Smith asked if the dedicated parkland would be contiguous. Planner Kozub stated she was not sure that the recreation and parks board would be interested in such a small area of dedicated parkland. Vice Chairperson Smith asked why the applicant did not seek R-3 zoning. Planner Kozub stated Staff would not have supported R-3 zoning in that locale. Mr. Caldwell stated the applicant was trying to maintain quality of design and the R-2 zoning provided for that. He added that this project had to bear a great burden with street improvements and the extension of public services to a private project. Vice Chairperson Smith asked if the open space on the original plans was greater or lesser than the open space on the amended plans. Planner Kozub stated she thought there was more open space on the original plans. Vice Chairperson Smith asked what would be in front of the hillside houses and if those houses had patios. Mr. Caldwell responded that landscaping was proposed in front of the hillside houses and some of the houses would have patios. Vice Chairperson Smith asked if the proposal was designated as “in-fill”. Planner Kozub stated that it does not meet the 2020 Master Plan definition of “in-fill”. Mr. Carpenter stated he preferred this proposal to the original. He stated there should be at least a patio for each dwelling. Mr. Caldwell stated that Sourdough Road would be widened to the southern property boundary. Mr. Nelson questioned whether the 25’ front yard setback could be included as open space. Ms. Asleson stated she had no real problems with the proposal, but she was not convinced that the density would work. She stated they should include a provision for maintenance of the open space, and provide some personal outdoor space for each unit. Mr. Raznoff stated the typology of the units was unique. He added that he thought the design had “individuality”. He stated he thought the design of the proposed development has earned them the additional unit. Mr. Hanson stated that, over all, the design had merit. He stated he thought the footprints were out of proportion and could be reduced. He added that he does not like the way the garages were set towards the front of the structures and so obvious. He suggested breaking up the long expanse of garage in the town homes. He stated he liked the carport idea and added that it could be dealt with architecturally. Vice Chairperson Smith stated she understood the difficulties of developing the property. She added that the proposal preserved the integrity of the land. She stated she would be a stickler on the density. She stated she did not like the location of the carports because they block access to the courtyard. She stated snow removal seemed to be a problem. She stated she mainly had concerns with the site and would wait to comment on the formal submittal. Mr. Hanson stated the applicant might adjust lots 1-3 and align them with Sourdough to clear the middle of the site and create a central hub. ITEM 5. ELECTION OF OFFICERS (Postponed from January 14 and 28, 2003) The DRB discussed Derek Strahn as a member of the DRB. They mentioned contacting some others who might be interested in applying for the Design Review Board. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved, Ms. Asleson seconded, to nominate Vice Chairperson Smith for Chairperson. Mr. Howe moved, Ms. Asleson seconded, to nominated Mr. Hanson for Vice Chairperson. Motion carried 6-0. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Ms. Asleson moved, Vice Chairperson Smith seconded, to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. ______________________________________________ Dawn Smith, Vice Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board