Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-23-02 Design Review Board Minutes.docDESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, JULY 23, 2002 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Henry Sorenson called the meeting to order at 3:37 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. He noted that since a quorum wasn’t present, the attending members would forward informal comments on each project to the City Commission. Members Present Staff Present Henry Sorenson Chris Saunders, Associate Planner Bill Hanson Susan Kozub, Assistant Planner Jami Morris, Assistant Planner Karin Caroline, Assistant Planner Carol Schott, Recording Secretary Visitors Present J.R. Reger Chris Burgard Jesse Sobrepena J.J. Chapman ITEM 2. CONSENT ITEM Lux Tower MaSP/COA #Z-02143 (Saunders) 145 Simmental Way * A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow a communication tower to provide infrastructure for wireless communication and accommodate multiple future users. Chairperson Sorenson asked if anyone had requested to remove the item from the Consent Agenda. J.R. Reger joined the DRB. The DRB members stated they were in favor of the application. ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW A. Big Look MaSP/COA #Z-02118 (Kozub) 705 Osterman Drive * A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a two-story, 18,251 sq. ft. light industrial and office building and related site improvements. Jesse Sobrepena and Chris Burgard joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Susan Kozub presented the staff report, highlighting conditions #1 through #5. Mr. Sobrepena noted the rooftop equipment would be screened from view at ground level. Planner Kozub noted the screening should include views from I-90 due to the topography. Mr. Sobrepena presented the project. Mr. Burgard noted they want an over-all structure that is interesting, yet affordable. Mr. Hanson asked for the purpose of having two distinct parking areas. Mr. Sobrepena noted the parking in the rear is for the shops’ area loading and unloading. The parking in front is for customers of the tenants. Mr. Burgard noted the rear parking would also be used by staff. He noted he wants the option to lease some of the space, however, if his business continues to grow, he will use all of the space. Mr. Hanson asked for the use of the overhead door on the front of the structure. Mr. Burgard noted the bay door was added for the use of the tenant in that section of the building; however, if his business expands as he thinks it will, there would be no need for the bay door. He noted the structure would look better without it. Mr. Hanson stated he felt the building had purpose behind its form; however the parking didn’t fit very well with the building or the lot. He suggested softening the front of the building with more landscaping. He suggested eliminating the parking stall across from the front of the building, and moving the building towards the Frontage Road. Mr. Burgard noted they tried to keep the large vehicle turnaround area in one place. Mr. Hanson noted the DRB would like to see the parking in front of the building moved to the rear to allow the building to address the Frontage Road. Mr. Burgard noted the customer would then have to walk around the structure to enter it. Mr. Hanson noted the parking would be quite tight in the northwest corner. Mr. Burgard reviewed the exterior materials proposed. Mr. Hanson suggested the addition of some treatment below the windows and at the base to help the building meet the ground. He stated the equipment on the roof has to be screened from Interstate 90 as well as the Frontage Road. Chairperson Sorenson asked if the applicant had any objections to staff’s recommendations. Mr. Burgard stated he had none. Chairperson Sorenson asked why the sidewalk doesn’t come into the building at a perpendicular angle to create a more friendly entrance. Mr. Burgard explained the curved sidewalk feature. Chairperson Sorenson commended the design composition, then asked what color banding was proposed to be used in place of the red band at the top of the structure. Mr. Sobrepena noted they would use flashing, etc. He discussed the color proposed for the band 2/3’s of the way up the building. Mr. Burgard asked that the signage remain flexible. He asked if signage could be placed on the I-90 side of the building. Planner Kozub noted the structure would be evaluated for the maximum square footage of signage allowed for the building. She stated a wall sign could be placed on any façade of the structure as long as the total signage was less than or equal to the maximum allowed. She stated the comments from the DRB members would be forwarded to the City Commission. Chairperson Sorenson noted two additional conditions and stated Mr. Hanson would recommend conditions regarding articulation of the brick at the base of the structure and the elimination of the parking stalls in front of the north-facing bay door and the parking stall in the northwest corner. B. Garcia Garage/Apt. Concept PUD #Z-02134 (Morris) 214 South Black Street * A Concept Planned Unit Development Application to construct a garage with an apartment above. Assistant Planner Jami Morris presented the staff report, highlighting the deficiencies she had identified. Chairperson Sorenson stated the design was reasonable thoughtful and in keeping with the principle structure. He noted the garage and apartment are very large and could be downsized effectively. He noted the proposal eliminated all of the open space. He stated a favorable aspect of the project was the increase of density, which might be permissible and desirable in this area. However, he stated, the total build-out of the lot and the parking were in excess. Mr. Hanson noted the proposal is in excess of what should fit on the lot. He noted the proposal would have substantial impacts on the adjoining properties. He stated an apartment could possibly be located there; however, no on-site parking was available. Chairperson Sorenson commended Planner Morris for her thorough review and comments. Mr. Hanson noted the project wouldn’t improve the overall design of the area. C. Ferraro’s Addition MaSP/COA #Z-02165 (Caroline) 726 North 7th Avenue * A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow a 2, 312 sq. ft. addition, an 880 sq. ft. outdoor dining area, and related site improvements. J.J. Chapman joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Karin Caroline presented the staff report. She noted the owner has been working with A&D Autobody and Little John’s for shared parking. She stated the owner had mentioned other improvements including the addition of parking lot defining curbing at the rear, repair and replacement of sidewalks, the addition of landscaping in the front of the building, and boulevard trees along both streets. She reviewed the recommended conditions, and the requirements for screening of rooftop mechanical equipment. Mr. Hanson stated he would support the project; however, it could make sense to have access from North 7th Avenue right-turn only as it would be safer to have one-way access and would reduce the drive aisle width. Mr. Chapman noted they tried right-in/right-out access several years ago and it didn’t work. Planner Caroline noted the access has historically been a two-way drive. He emphasized that the roof-top mechanical equipment was to be thoroughly screened. Chairperson Sorenson commended on the design, stating one aspect was the lack of transparency with the west elevation to allow a feeling of togetherness with the outside. He noted that rows of parking stalls of more than ten spaces usually require a landscape island. Planner Caroline noted a 100 foot unbroken parking area is allowed by code for parking stalls without a landscape island. Mr. Chapman reviewed the materials he proposed for the facades. Both Board members stated this proposal is a great improvement over what currently exists. ITEM 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Design Review Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m. _____________________________________________ Henry Sorenson, Chairperson