Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB-041013.MinDESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 2013 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pentecost called the meeting of the Design Review Board to order at 5:33 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 Mel Howe Sally Thomas, Administrative Assistant II Michael Pentecost, Chairperson Chris Saunders, Policy and Planning Manager Mark Hufstetler Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager Cristina Coddington Lori Garden Walter Banziger Bill Rea Visitors Present: Kyle Tage and Laura Dornberger, Locati Architects Kent Marsalis, Barnard Construction Tim Kearns Tom Eastwood ITEM 2. MINUTES OF MARCH 13, 2013 MOTION: Mr. Howe moved, Mr. Rea seconded, to approve the minutes of March 13, 2013 as presented. The motion carried 7-0. ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Barnard Construction Master SP #Z-13028 (Saunders) 701 Gold Avenue * A Master Site Plan Application to allow a three phase commercial office building expansion and a first phase site plan with related site improvements on 10.232 acres. Mr. Saunders presented a summary of the project: There has been a building on the site since the early 90s, first addition around 1998. Request is for extended approval period, 3 phases, parking area. Site in I90 entryway corridor road is elevated 20 ft as it passes the site, no street visibility. Does have ground level visibility at Bond and Gold street. Comparatively a low-visibility site, architecture diversity of material and type echoes what is currently there, there isn’t a specific time schedule for Phase 2 & 3, parking will also be phased and won’t cause significant disruption. There are no deviations, purely an administrative review. DCR recommends acceptance. Mr. Tage added that the existing structure was cedar clapboard siding. Trying to create a new corporate entryway conference rooms and staff facilities, linked by breezeways to other phases. Transition from two to three stories. Flat roof to create a more varied roofline. Questions: Ms. Garden inquired about windows/siding being changed, and about the entrance. Mr. Tage responded there is no change in siding, but windows will change as some materials are no longer being manufactured. He added that there is currently no defined entrance, and that one will be added along with guest parking in Phase 1. Mr. Rea inquired about construction grades during phases. Mr. Saunders responded that aside from regular stormwater regulations, the Code does not specify additional requirements between phases. Mr. Rea also asked about a storage shed, and Mr. Tage responded that there is an existing shed (pole barn). Ms. Coddington confirmed the presence of a bridge and trail on the property. Mr. Hufstetler asked about visual continuity between the old and new buildings. Mr. Tage responded that the materials will have commonality. Mr. Hufstetler stated his concern that the building have a more compact mass. Mr. Tage responded that the design was prompted by the phasing and by the logistical needs of the building. Chairman Pentecost confirmed that the building will be used for offices. He also asked if a traffic study had been done on Gold and Bond. Mr. Saunders replied that no study has been done, but the street is adequate to carry the increased traffic. Ms. Garden inquired about a unified color scheme. Mr. Tage replied that the color scheme will be compatible. Mr. Tage also reiterated that because of elevation it is very difficult to see the building from the interstate. Mr. Rea asked about ongoing piles of construction materials throughout the phasing. Mr. Mersalis replied that the construction company in this case has great credibility and this should not be an issue. Ms. Coddington said she liked the layout, but the materials didn’t look like anything in Bozeman. She recommended perhaps a darker wood color, dress with plants, make it wooded. Mr. Hufstetler recognized economic realities, and proposed vertically oriented windows. He liked the color palettes and landscaping. Wished for a more compact design. Mr. Howe commented that the project was handsome, although the section cornices seemed opulent. Mr. Banziger stated he had no design issues. Agrees with Ms. Garden about the material matching to tie with existing facility. He believes the project is going in a great direction and would support staff’s comments. Chairman Pentecost inquired about LEED etc. Mr. Tage responded focused on this as a master plan concept. They will be discussing all the sustainable options. Chairman Pentecost fully supports this project. MOTION: Mr. Banziger moved, Mr. Hufstetler seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the Planning Director for Barnard Construction Master SP #Z-13028 with Staff conditions as outlined in the Staff report. The motion carried 7-0. 2. Town Pump #1 CUP/COA/VAR/DEV #Z-13052 (Krueger) 803 East Main Street * A Conditional Use Permit with a Certificate of Appropriateness and Variance to parking and loading setbacks and a Deviation for setback and fueling canopy height to allow the demolition of the existing structure and fuel pump islands and construction of a new fueling station/convenience store and fuel pump islands. Mr. Krueger presented the project Summary: Staff has been working on for quite some time, underwent informal at the DRC over a year ago. Applicant chose not to come to the DRB at that time. Tonight COA, deviations and variance. East Main Street and North Broadway. Property ownership will not change, but additional property will be acquired. Will expand existing site by common boundary realignment and will aggregate lots. Existing ditch to be routed through a concrete box culvert and rebuild the site with a new convenience store with auto fuel sales. Conditional use for auto fuel sales required in the B-2 district. There are two requested deviations: 1. canopy height (zoning standard in ordinance is 18’), many canopies ask for additional height. 2. setback from primary building into the required setback along East Main Street. Both are recommended for approval. Encroachment for fuel pump island andcirculation exceeds 25 ft B-2 parking and loading setback requires a variance. Staff affirmative recommendation today to with the Design Review Board on the project. But one of the big issues is engineering recommends to close the southern access. It is a two-fold argument: 1 public health and safety (high potential that the intersection will be signalized MT Dept of transportation) traffic waiting at the signal has high potential to conflict with that traffic at that location and 2 aesthetic. Fuel tanks to remain where they are. Rollover curb has limited success and staff sees potential maintenance issues with that. Right turn requirement often violated/not enforced. Streetscape should be as high a standard as possible due to the requested deviations and conditional use. Began this process informally with a very strong argument that building should be on a corner, but it became apparent that the design could not sustain security issues, and other operational concerns. Design as presented other than southernmost access on Broadway meets a lot of the design objectives. Today this design is supported by staff with the outlined conditions, with a few minor changes. Building architecture is similar to design seen on 19th Avenue but this design has expanded fenestration, higher amount of glazing. Some subjectivity as to franchises. This circumstances the design for Town Pump on 19th was different and this proposal is designed for this site and staff believes it works in both locations. Crosswalks are a challenge and sidewalks. Broadway and East Main Street is a primary crossing for the Sweet Pea Festival . Signalized crosswalk. Trail system connects here. Acknowledge the northern access is larger that typically allowed, but if southern access were to be closed there is potential for a fuelling vehicle moving through site in another way. Street furniture and palette of amenities requires a condition. Seating wall and bike rack on Broadway frontage. This site is a transition from the character of the downtown streetscape bottom of hill transitions from downtown to expanded East Main Street. Park Place development further east includes planted blvd. Vac shop to be developed to a more urban street setting. Bldg location encroachment requires deviation along East Main Street. The 777 Bldg west of this site is slight angle concrete and averages 15-20 from the right of way from Aleworks driveway east and most would see this project in alignment with the 777 building while coming down the hill, heading west. Mr. Tage: Over a year now working on solutions. Graded coming down off hill. 5’ retaining wall to make up dirt. Vacant parcel between Jackpot Casino. Looked at it from a master plan perspective. Architectural elements are just picking up the flavor of downtown Bozeman brick facade, awing style elements over windows and doors, gables to play against the platforms. Canopy to fit into an urban context. Mr. Howe: No questions. Mr. Hufstetler: Is the east end of the building as close to the lot line as it can be so no landscaping? Mr. Tage: True. Mr. Hufstetler, people driving down hill would see roof? Mr. Tage: Yes. South access removal? Mr. Tage can’t see path to do this project without a southern access, and will ask commission to accept a southern access. If this is not approved, they will sit on the project. Mr. Hufstetler trail system more width on sidewalk/landscaping to help enhance the north/south corridor. Mr. Krueger spoke with Gary Vodenall at GVLT. Both sides of street along Broadway would look similar to 777 bldg. frontage with planting strip, 5’ sidewalk, and lights. Trying to put a 10’ shared use section in a delicate area would bring too much impervious area. Broadway frontage is terrible condition today. Gary suggested putting a trail sign at the appropriate connection. People should slow down enough at the intersection. Signal is the most important part of that crossing. Felt it was an appropriate design. Ms. Coddington: If access is allowed, will Broadway rd turn into a right turn only? Mr. Krueger replied that MDT might not allow access at that location even if the City allows it. The Commission could modify the conditions. But city staff recommends removal of southern access. Tree removal: is there intent to replenish that area? Mr. Tage, yes they will add landscaping. Mr. Krueger asked about the remaining lot widthalong East Main Street east of this site? Mr. Tage replied 120--not much. Trees may not be there but there will be a building with a similar streetscape Locati bldg. up the street. That new building would be a close to that building as possible. Mr. Rea: Is the 777 Building zoned B-2? Mr. Krueger replied yes. B-3 has 0 setback (transition is at Wallace). The distance from curb to building averages 20’ and is supposed to be 25’. Mr. Rea is very concerned about the face on the street, storage room, office, and storage room upstairs. Concerned that the window will be piled up or boarded over. Guarantee that the windows stay alive? Mr. Howe: Could use reflective glass. Mr. Tage: concern is valid. Reflective glass or opaque would be a better solution. Mr. Rea: Is staff comfortable with the landscaping plan? Mr. Krueger: the character would extend around the whole site. A lot of plantings proposed for the space available. Mr. Rea: Seems like too much at that corner. Brian: trying to fill the bottom of the canopy to the streetwall. Regular planting of blvd trees and woody texture in the winter. Ms. Garden: why does the applicant want southernmost access on Broadway? Mr. Tage: for fuel delivery trucks and larger traffic--would have more frequent fuel delivery trucks (can’t get largest truck in there). Mr. Krueger restated public health and safety concerns. He sees opportunities to move tank, shift entire canopy, etc. to make that site work up to and including expanding the site. They will take the position to the commission. 777 bldg is opposite of the site. Directly to the north is small strip of land entrance to the village downtown, trail. At DRC Larry Pearson is working on a building across Mendenhall intersects Broadway 2 story office building. B&G grain elevator, railroad still active. Has the potential to be an interesting area. Ms. Garden: Is there glass around the doors? Mr. Tage: Spandrel is proposed. Mr. Banziger: Does the design foreshadow that future TPs will be similar? Mr. Tage says yes but no cookie-cutter. Mr. Pentecost: What happens if the mountable curbs are removed? Mr. Tage: The regular curb would remain for traffic, more planting, pedestrian lining, etc. Mr. Hufstetler: It there an anticipated vehicle count change? Mr. Krueger: Yes, there was a full traffic study. Failing turning movement at Broadway onto East Main must be mitigated before the project can go forward. Mr. Tage: The convenience store is tripling in size. Comments: Mr. Hufstetler: Started to see uncertainties about the project. 1. Traffic: he could not get into existing TP. People going downhill into a congested area. Broadway access is very problematic and won’t support project with it. Architecture is good. High quality building but is too generic and doesn’t speak to either Bozeman or the location; is too suburban for the period architecture of that area. Could use some visual clues from existing buildings, especially the canopies. Likes stepped canopies, but they don’t fit the area perhaps use grain elevator. Landscaping challenge end of urban core, strong pedestrian bike presence. Has a Huffine Lane feel, suggests more urban feel. Agrees that rollover curbs are problematic. Ms. Coddington. Agrees with Mr. Hufstetler and Mr. Krueger’s comments. Won’t recommend with the southern access. Agrees with Mr. Hufstetler’s tightening recommendations. Mr. Rea: Believes it’s as good as it’s going to get on this site. Likes the fact that the islands are the corner. But he won’t support it. It doesn’t work as a downtown entryway and isn’t the right place for a fueling station. Concerned about potential for removal of trees and more signage. Great effort, but not the direction for the site. He won’t support it. Ms. Gardner. Could lose a pump or so. Overall like it. Move snow storage on corner. Mr. Krueger: Best spot is in the stormwater retention area to the north of the site.. Ms. Gardner: Is there a way to block off for fueling truck? Walt: Agrees the project is a valiant attempt. He sides with Mr. Hufstetler on contextual design aspects. Should emulate more 1930’s style. Supports staff on access comments, particularly site access on south. Is there a better way to make that work? Believes MDT will say no because of signal there. He won’t support it but wants to see more. Chairman Pentecost: He agrees with Mr. Rea project doesn’t fit the parcel. He completely supports staff recommendations. Commended the building, but not convinced is right building for the location. Mr. Tage asked if Chairman Pentecost feels that the design not right, or if he does not want fuel station there? Chairman Pentecost was not convinced that the gas station is too big for that corner--it’s a scale issue. He might be convinced if scale was different, but two-story mass may not appropriate for the site. Mr. Hufstetler: Building is intended for people for people coming into town, who won’t really see it. However, it is very visible to the urban core of the town. Mr. Rea: Said that it feels too suburban (e.g., West Main or 19th). He reminded that there is a view from library and Lindley Park. He does not think it is the right project for the site. He would not support any kind of a gas station there. If curb cut is a deal killer, he is fine with it. Waterway, tree removal, both hot topics. Mr. Banziger: He would prefer that it has a better feel. He would possibly support it then. Ms Coddington: Suggested moving pumps to the back, the addition of trails or a pocket park would make it more of an urban environment. Mr. Hufstetler: Doesn’t object to gas station at the site, but it needs to be integrated more fully. Nee to find ways to provide a design more indigenous to the neighborhood, and that pushes the pump area to the north from where it is now. Mr. Rea: Wouldn’t mind seeing more height on it. Aerial view. Centerline of the ditch is the front of the building. MOTION: Mr. Howe Mmoved that DRB recommends acceptance of the zoning application in terms of its aesthetics only. No second on the motion. MOTION: Mr. Hufstetler moved, Mr. Rea seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Town Pump #1 CUP/COA/VAR/DEV #Z-13052 with Staff conditions as outlined in the Staff report. The motion failed 4 to 3 (Mr. Howe, Ms. Gardner and Chairman Pentecost yes, Mr. Hufstetler, Mr. Rea, Mr. Banziger and Ms. Coddington no). 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.} No public comment was forthcoming. ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m. Michael Pentecost, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board