Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-13-11 Design Review Board Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY,JULY 13, 2011 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pentecost called the meeting of the Design Review Board to order at 5:32 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 Randy Wall Tim McHarg, Planning Director Bill Rea Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Michael Pentecost Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Page Huyette Mark Hufstetler Scott Bechtle Carson Taylor, Commission Liaison Visitors Present Kyle Tage Steve Gordon Cecilia Vaniman Dan Sampson ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JUNE 22,2011 MOTION: Mr. Wall moved, Ms. Huyette seconded, to approve the minutes of June 22, 2011 as presented. The motion carried 4-0. ITEM 3. INFORMAL REVIEW 1. Town Pump 97 INFORMAL #I-11008 (Krueger) 1871 Baxter Lane * An Informal Application for advice and comment on the construction of 10,804 square foot convenience store building with associated automobile fuel sales and related site improvements. Scott Bechtle joined the DRB. Kyle Tage, Steve Gordon, Cecilia Vaniman, and Dan Sampson joined the DRB. Associate Planner Brian Krueger presented the Staff Memo noting he would work through some of the large topics and then discuss individual issues; Staff had identified access to the site as one of the bigger issues. He stated the design was fairly consistent with what had been seen recently with a caveat that the fueling facilities canopy would include a gable roof that would be taller than the Page 1 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011 allowable height and would require a deviation from the Ordinance. He stated Staff felt the canopy design was supported and was somewhat similar to the Costco canopy design. He stated the issues with automobile and pedestrian access to the site and through the site were of concern. He stated the Design Objectives Plan predated much of what had been approved along 19th Avenue and had been intended to provide general guidelines with regard to the site design and circulation on the site as well as to adjacent properties. He stated the proposal could be made more efficient by providing the pedestrian and vehicular connectivity. He stated Staff had suggested the access points be provided in a more formalized pattern; it would make more sense to eliminate one of the accesses. He stated the drive isles were all very large and could be more efficiently placed, as well as sized. He stated Staff felt the landscaping should be more thoughtfully designed to tie the building to the setbacks. He stated the second big topic was the site itself and the lack of building frontage to the street. He stated Staff realized the focus was the fueling canopies and suggested there could be a connection to the building from the pedestrian system currently in the City without traversing the parking areas. He stated the location of the structure on the corner would require a more thoughtful design of the site. He directed the Board to a rendering of recent projects and their locations along 19th Avenue; nearly all the more recent buildings had been located at the setback line. He stated the Holiday Gas Station was not necessarily on the street but had provided a presence in that location; had it been placed at the setback line it would have been a much better project and provide more enclosure on the corner. He reiterated that it would be important for the building to connect with the streetscape. Planner Krueger stated there was an opportunity for an outdoor seating area and could be incorporated and be more successful if the building were located along the streetscape. He stated there was no safe connection to the community pedestrian system from the primary entrance so a primary entrance had not been identified. He stated two or three additional buildings could be included on the site; the proposed layout was large and could be brought together more closely. Mr. Hufstetler joined the DRB. Planner Krueger stated North 19th Avenue was restricted to a monument sign and discussions had been held regarding signage that would connect with the building itself and possibly the pedestrian path. He stated he would be happy to answer any questions. Mr. Tage stated they were thrilled with the prospect of helping to construct a Town Pump gas station. He stated they were committed to building a structure with the urban infill character that Bozeman wanted to see. He stated he thought it was best to provide a proposal that met the intent of what Town Pump would like to see. He stated the drive aisles had been proposed as wide to allow for the safety and adequate turn around space for commercial vehicles using the site. He stated they felt the proposed fuel canopy would address the corner and the streetscape; it would not be a destination but rather a brief stop. He stated they did not want to be ambiguous about the fact that it would be a gas station; there weren't really any other good locations as the median on 19th Avenue would constrain access. Mr. Sampson stated he understood the idea of shrinking the width of the drive aisles but their number one concern after 50 years in the business Page 2 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011 was the safety of people driving on their lots; traffic on 19th Avenue included a lot of truck and trailer traffic with a wide variety of other vehicles. Mr. Hufstetler asked for clarification of landscaping in one location. Mr. Sampson responded the area would contain seeded grass. Mr. Hufstetler asked if Town Pump preferred the pump lines to be parallel or perpendicular to the principal structure. Mr. Sampson responded it depended on the access to the site but the current proposal was what they would like to see for the purpose of safety. Mr. Hufstetler stated he was stricken fairly heavily by the traffic areas that were not rectangular, but instead parallelograms and asked if those traffic situations were considered undesirable. Mr. Sampson responded Town Pump did not see it as an issue and explained how vehicular movements on site would occur; he added the vehicular movement was another argument to allow wider aisle widths. Mr. Tage added they had originally prepared a site plan with a carwash included and had since removed the car wash to rush to submit the drawings. Planner Krueger responded that in general Staff supported smaller aisles and circulation areas that were logical and would direct people in a better way to the safest route such as aisles constructed on a grid as people had been accustomed to for years. He stated one of the most widely used commercial fuel pumps included narrow aisles with a small structure parallel to the fueling lanes; they serviced a significant amount of traffic, including larger vehicles, with their small facility. Mr. Hufstetler asked for clarification of the proposed landscaping. Planner Krueger responded a landscape plan was not required with an Informal Application and explained what had been depicted on the site plan; he added the required buffering for the parking area had not been depicted with the submittal. Mr. Wall asked if there was a requirement to recreate the swale or special recognition for what had previously existed. Planner Krueger responded there was no requirement for recreation of the feature on the lot nor was their recognition that it had once been in that location. Mr. Wall asked if the lots would need to be aggregated prior to construction. Planner Krueger responded the DRC had identified the issue and all the necessary aggregations and relocations could be handled with one Subdivision Exemption Application. Mr. Wall asked if Baxter Lane was considered an urban boundary limit or gateway to Bozeman. Planner Krueger responded Baxter Lane was not an urban boundary limit or necessarily a gateway but Baxter Lane was a heavily used traffic facility. Mr. Wall asked the plans for the lot to the east. Mr. Sampson responded there were currently no plans for the adjacent lot and they were hoping to get some type of developer in that location. Vice Chairperson Rea asked for clarification of regional pedestrian connections. Planner Krueger responded the applicant had shown the appropriate standards for the trail as well as the sidewalk, but they were not connected to anything else on site. Vice Chairperson Rea asked if the shared access at Commerce Way would be part of the current proposal. Mr. Tage responded it would be part of the current application. Vice Chairperson Rea asked if the applicant had investigated the canopies being connected and brought around the corner. Mr. Sampson responded they could investigate that arrangement. Vice Chairperson Rea asked the logic behind the proposed site design. Mr. Sampson responded that if an area were within a barrier, thefts would increase and the safety of the customers would be decreased. Page 3 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011 Mr. Bechtle asked if the applicant had investigated locating the building closer to the intersection at 19th Avenue. Mr. Sampson responded they had done several designs before they finalized it, but had not brought the building as far forward as suggested by Staff. Mr. Bechtle stated he thought it would be a great looking building and a great display for marketing; he suggested locating the building closer to 19th would still provide visibility to the site while allowing room for future expansion. Mr. Sampson responded the distance required from the intersection to the access would work with the current proposal but would be nullified if the building were relocated. Mr. Bechtle asked whose jurisdiction it would be to allow the access onto North 19th Avenue. Planner Krueger responded the Montana Department of Transportation would have to review and approved the access location and design. Mr. Bechtle asked if Staff was suggesting the elimination of one of the accesses. Planner Krueger responded they were suggested one be eliminated due to safety concerns with stacking issues but the proposed access also would not meet the minimum distance requirements from an intersection; he added a different configuration of the intersection may be seen in the future, but the minimization of curb cuts was also suggested in the Design Objectives Plan. Mr. Bechtle asked if a shared access agreement would be required for the second access proposed for the site. Planner Krueger responded the shared access would be addressed during the review of the Subdivision Exemption Application. Mr. Bechtle suggested the applicant investigate bringing the building more toward 19th Avenue. Chairperson Pentecost asked if a Deviation would be required for the canopy height. Planner Krueger responded Chairperson Pentecost was correct and there was a code provision for a maximum height of 18 feet for detached fuel canopies. Mr. Sampson asked if the Deviation request would be supportable by Staff Planner Krueger responded the current proposal would make it difficult to support the Deviation request as the criteria for granting such a request would require a higher standard of site design and use of materials. Mr. Hufstetler stated he had inherent bias in reviewing this Town Pump proposal as he was hopelessly addicted to the popcorn they served there. He commended the applicant on the architecture of the proposed building and he thought it was really well done and invoked industrial transportation history in Bozeman. He suggested using a contemporary material for the proposed stonework. He stated he liked the gabled canopies a lot, but he thought there was the potential for the canopies to visually degrade from the building; people would see the canopies and not the building as much as it deserved. He suggested investigating alternative canopy placement as opposed to canopy design and including a traffic pattern that would allow the pumps to be placed parallel to the building; it would help integrate the canopy building into the architecture of the primary structure. He stated the traffic flow of the site would be critical and suggested the Holiday Gas Station circulation was horrible; the clearances were tight and the pumps were perpendicular to the building causing very tight turns. He stated he saw the same scenario in the current proposal, if spread out more on the site. He stated the interchange layout of the gas station included undefined drive aisles which would be problematic; there would be areas with minimal traffic influence and people would be attempting to find their own way across the site. He encouraged the applicant to re-evaluate the site arrangement. He stated he had mixed feelings about the importance of the building being located more closely to 19th Page 4 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011 Avenue; the most important, visible part of the lot would be asphalt with nothing going on in that location and would be an inefficient use of the space. He suggested tying the building to the streetscape in some way would be important. He stated he thought there were a variety of possible ways to provide cohesion the in the landscape theme proposed for the site and suggested congruency should be included. He stated he was overall happy to see the design of the building and suggested it would be a huge improvement for the streetscape. Mr. Wall thanked the applicant for taking the time to complete Informal review. He stated he thought the Staff Report was well done and that Planner Krueger had done an excellent job. He stated that when there were 37 items addressing the Design Objectives Plan criteria the applicant should take notice of those comments as there was a common theme. He stated the business would be vehicle intensive, but he would prefer to see a type of development along the corridor that would de-emphasize automobiles and put more emphasis on pedestrians and bicyclists. He stated placing the building on the setback line would provide consistency along 19th Avenue and would basically fill the vacancy. He stated there would be plenty of visibility to the fuel pumps from Baxter Lane and 19th Avenue even if the building was set closer to 19th Avenue. He suggested the pumps could be angled behind the building which would make a nicer statement than a sea of asphalt. He stated he would like to see an outdoor seating area included. He asked if the median had been accurately depicted. Mr. Sampson responded he thought it had been accurately depicted. Mr. Wall suggested pushing the North 19th Avenue access to the north a little further to discourage people from turning left out of the site. He suggested the applicant review the Staff Report and should relocate the building to the setback line. Vice Chairperson Rea stated he concurred with most of the previous DRB comments. He thanked the applicant for bringing a proposal that was not franchise architecture. He stated he was pleased with the design of the buildings though he had seen poor examples of the proposed roofing materials. Mr. Sampson responded they had already modified the roofing material to be a brown standing seam metal. Vice Chairperson Rea stated he understood the reasoning for the site design and suggested it would be neat to have classic railroad enameled signage that would complement the structure. He stated he agreed with Mr. Wall's suggestions and indicated that the solution to addressing the streetscape might lie in the design of the canopy. He stated the canopy elevation seemed bland while the canopy section was tasty; he added he would much rather see the section instituted on the site than the elevation. He stated he particularly liked the two story feature and suggested it would be interesting to get a third story to provide more breaks in the massing. He stated he thought it was a nice proposal and they had the right approach. Mr. Bechtle stated he really liked the design of the project and he thought it would be a nice entry element for the corridor. He stated he liked their material selection and it seemed it had been well thought out. He stated he liked the horizontal emphasis on the building but the site layout caused him some concern. He stated there would be more fluid traffic flows and visibility to the fueling stations would be maintained if the principal building were located nearer to 19th Avenue. He stated he was concerned with the gable roof element of the canopy due to snowshed as well as emphasizing the principal structure. He stated he thought outdoor seating should be included and he thought it would be used during the nicer times of the year. He thanked the Page 5 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011 applicant for submitting an application for Informal review and stated it was refreshing to see a higher quality Town Pump design. He suggested the applicant take a look at the design and added that he was supportive of Staff's recommendations. Chairperson Pentecost reiterated that the building placement needed to be reconsidered and noted he was concerned that there would be "corner cutting" at the intersection during a red light though he did not know if relocating the structure would prevent it. He stated it would be worth continued study of what would happen if the fueling pumps were located to the rear of the site. He stated he agreed with Vice Chairperson Rea that the front most building would become signage for the site and additional signage would be included on the primary building so it would be obvious that it was a fueling station. He asked if there had been any thought to LEED or sustainability features. Mr. Sampson responded they were midway through a canopy and lighting study and had already included energy efficient bulbs. ITEM 4. 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 comment forthcoming. ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 6:52 p.m. Michael Pentecost, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board Page 6 of 6 Design Review Board Minutes—July 13,2011