Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-23-11 Design Review Board MinutesDESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2011 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pro Tem Rea called the meeting of the Design Review Board to order at 5:40 p.m. in the upstairs conference room of the Alfred Stiff Professional Building, 20 East Olive Street, Bozeman, Montana and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Staff Present Mark Hufstetler Courtney Kramer, Assistant Planner Bill Rea Tim McHarg, Planning Director Walter Banziger Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Visitors Present Carson Taylor Greg Dennee Laura Dornberger ITEM 2. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10, 2010 The minutes were continued to the next meeting of the DRB. ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Happel SHR COA/DEV #Z-11019 (Kramer) 608 South Grand Avenue * A Certificate of Appropriateness Application with a deviation to allow the construction of a new single household structure as well as the reconstruction of a 768 sq. ft. detached garage accessory building within the required 20 foot rear yard setback. Assistant Planner Courtney Kramer presented the Staff Report noting the site was where a previous historic home had been demolished; since then the original approval had expired and a new application for redevelopment of the property had been submitted. She stated Staff had three concerns that had been identified in the staff report. Greg Dennee and Laura Dornberger joined the DRB. Mr. Dennee stated the property had been sold to the Happel’s and their goal had been to build something in the context of the bungalow Craftsman style realm within the Bon Ton Historic District. He stated the proposal included a second story and full basement that would be partially finished. He stated a garage had also been proposed for the site and would require a Deviation due to the size of the proposed structure. Planner Kramer stated the proposed craftsman design would not stand out too much within the District. She stated the window patterns presented for the house were consistent with the neighborhood, Staff’s only concern was the nature of the divided lights on the front elevation where there would normally be a fixed pane with less divided light. Walter Banziger joined the DRB. Mr. Hufstetler asked if any public comment had been received regarding the proposal. Planner Kramer responded the project had been noticed on site and in the paper as well as sent to the Inter Neighborhood Council and the only public comment received was in support of the project. Mr. Hufstetler asked why the originally approved project had not been completed. Planner Kramer responded she thought the previous owner of the property had difficulties with the neighbors and had decided to move. Mr. Hufstetler asked if the demolition had been contingent on the construction of a new residence. Planner Kramer responded she was uncertain the specific conditions of approval regarding the demolition, but would investigate. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea asked if the proposed style was allowed within the Bon Ton Historic District. Planner Kramer responded it was allowed as the neighborhood was eclectic; she added cedar shingle replaced with asphalt shingle would be appropriate for the area and standing seam metal was sometimes seen. Mr. Hufstetler added the metal was uncommon, but not unheard of. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea stated he thought there was specific language excluding metal roofs. Planner Kramer responded that corrugated metal had been denied in the District, but standing seam metal was being considered. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea stated it felt as though the sketches were of two different scales making one seem smaller and asked for the applicant to confirm their accuracy. Mr. Dennee directed the Board to the most accurate rendering; a model of the proposed structures overlaying a photograph of the site. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea asked if the public notice included property owners within 200 feet of the site. Planner Kramer responded notice had been sent to those owners within 200 feet of the property. Mr. Dennee added he had contacted the neighbors and met with them to discuss the project and they were supportive of the proposal as presented. Mr. Banziger asked if Staff was alright with the proposed stonework. Planner Kramer responded Staff had found that stonework on a craftsman style house was common; it would be a minor shift from the existing neighborhood. Mr. Hufstetler stated that in general he liked most aspects of the proposed building as it incorporated three or four of his favorite design elements. He stated it was perhaps not the most appropriate building for the historic district though he didn’t think it inappropriate either. He stated it seemed tall for a 1 ½ story building but was overall respectful to the historic district. He stated he was fine with the proposed window arrangements as they reminded him of the prairie home design. He stated one of his concerns was the proposed metal roofing and suggested shingle roofing should be incorporated. He stated he found the proposed stonework to be inappropriate as most of the stonework in Bozeman was cobblestone and found locally. He stated he was concerned with regard to what had happened to the originally approved demolition and reconstruction; he added it was extremely inappropriate for these instances of demolition to happen. He asked Staff to provide him with an explanation of what had happened with the original approval. Planner Kramer asked Mr. Hufstetler to address the five foot setback. Mr. Hufstetler responded he was fine with the setback as proposed; the rigidity of the setbacks in the district as a whole would not be affected. Mr. Banziger stated he concurred with Mr. Hufstetler that the proposed windows would be complimentary and there were not too many proposed; he added the proposed building looked quite nice and proportionate. He stated the placement of the building fell within the requirements of the zoning ordinance and he thought it was set back perfectly. He stated he would prefer to see a shingle roof (either asphalt or wood) as it would look much better than the metal roof though he did not think it would detract significantly from the neighborhood. He stated he felt the stonework proposed would maintain the eclectic feel of the neighborhood and he was supportive of the project as proposed. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea stated he was fine with the windows as proposed as well as the location of the structure on the lot; he added he thought the setback was enough of an authority and he would place the house in the same location. He stated the design of the house would accept having a neighbor pretty well. He stated the standing seam metal roof would come down to a color and manufacturer issue; he added the neighborhood was eclectic and the structure would not detract from the neighborhood. He stated he had a real problem with the proposed stonework; not just the type, but the quantity as well. He stated it was historically odd to have the base of the house done in stone. He added it would look like an alpine, rustic, rural stone solution and suggested the river cobble (rounded stones) would be more appropriate; he concurred with Staff. He stated he would not deny the proposal because of the proposed stonework and suggested the applicant investigate an alternative material. He commended the applicant on a nice job. Mr. Hufstetler suggested river cobble would definitely help the design. Chairperson Pro Tem Rea stated the “applied” river cobble could look worse. ITEM 4. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Election of Officers was continued to the next 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.} Seeing no general public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Pro Tem Rea closed the public comment portion of the meeting. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 6:15 p.m. Bill Rea, Chairperson Pro Tem City of Bozeman Design Review Board