HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-14-02 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD
TUESDAY, MAY 14, 2002
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Henry Sorenson called the meeting to order at 3:38 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Henry Sorenson Chris Saunders, Associate Planner
Dan Glenn Carol Schott, Recording Secretary
Bill Hanson
Joanne Mannell Noel
Dick Pohl
Jim Raznoff
Dawn Smith
Nichole Wills
Visitors Present
Rob Pertzborn
Matthew Killian
Eryn Milaksen
Ryun Anderson
ITEM 2. MINUTES OF APRIL 23, 2002
Chairperson Sorenson called for additions or corrections to the minutes of April 23, 2002. MOTION: Hearing none, Mr. Hanson moved, Ms. Mannell Noel seconded, to approve as the minutes
of April 23, 2002, as submitted. The motion carried unanimously.
ITEM 3. ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Chairperson Sorenson called for nominations for Chairperson – Ms. Mannell Noel nominated, Mr. Pohl seconded, Dawn Smith. Mr. Hanson nominated, Mr. Glenn seconded, Henry Sorenson. Mr.
Glenn noted whomever is chair needs to be consistent in attendance. Mr. Hanson moved, Mr. Raznoff seconded, to close the nominations for chairperson. Mr. Sorenson was re-elected Chairperson
following several ballots.
Chairperson Sorenson called for nominations for Vice Chairperson. Mr. Glenn nominated, Ms. Mannell Noel seconded, Dawn Smith for Vice Chairperson. Ms. Smith was elected Vice Chairperson
by acclamation.
ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
DOP Update #Z-02022 (Saunders)
* A Design Objectives Plan Update proposal to update the existing Design Objectives Plan.
Matthew Killian presented a draft of the Bozeman Entryway Corridor Design Guidelines Update prepared by his group from MSU’s Community Design Center (CDC). The Board discussed the issue
of copyrighted photos. Ryun Anderson noted he plans to work this summer on gaining permissions to any copyrighted materials. Discussion ensued on including structure design with dual
entries along arterial streets, the possible use of positive as well as negative examples, the lack of New Urbanism sources in the Bibliography, the changes and additions to the original
Design Objectives Plan created by Hinshaw, the use of photos rather than sketches, the lack of description as to how the items in the photographs demonstrate the guideline(s), the need
for captions to explain the guideline being illustrated, the use of Pattern Language as a method of presenting an idea, and the need for the developer to think beyond the property lines
to the adjacent properties when designing a raw piece of land.
Mr. Hanson noted the document would be used as a road map for an undeveloped piece of land. He was concerned that a person, who didn’t have a background in architecture, would not understand
the photographs. He noted the document should be clear and crisp and written for the layperson. He stated the lighting indicated on the plans doesn’t meet code. He noted sketches
with the photographs helped make the intent more clear.
Mr. Glenn asked why each corridor has different guidelines. Mr. Killian and Mr. Anderson explained that each corridor has different characteristics and the intent was to continue the
atmosphere in each corridor. Mr. Glenn noted the draft document was a good start on improving the current DOP.
Chairperson Sorenson commended the students on their work. He noted the use of squares, arrows, etc. to focus the attention on certain elements within the photographs was well done.
He stated the graphics were useful.
Ms. Smith commented that the document doesn’t contain any information for Chapters 7 & 8. Mr. Killian noted the students didn’t have anything new to add; therefore, those sections would
be completed by others with more expertise. Ms. Smith suggested the document include more sketches.
Ms. Wills noted the photographs show too much detail, whereas a sketch focuses on the detail being emphasized.
Mr. Anderson asked where this process should go next. The consensus of the Board was to clarify and simplify the document. It was noted continuation of the document update would shift
from a student-developed document to a professional document. Associate Planner Chris Saunders noted the students and Staff realize there was much to be done to complete the document.
Chairperson Sorenson thanked the students for their efforts.
ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Design Review Board, Mr. Pohl moved, several members seconded, to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned 5:05 p.m.
_______________________________________
Henry Sorenson, Chairperson
City of Bozeman Design Review Board