Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRB-112013 minMINUTES DESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2013 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pentecost 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 took the attendance. Members Present Staff Present  Michael Pentecost, Chairperson Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager  Mark Hufstetler Pat Jacobs, Associate Planner  Bill Rea   Mel Howe Visitors Present   Susan Riggs  Members Absent Rob Pertzborn  Walter Banziger Scott Bechtle Lori Garden Pete Colvin Andy Holloran Troy Scherer     ITEM 2. MINUTES OF AUGUST 28, 2013 Motion: Mr. Howe moved, Mr. Hufstetler seconded, to approve the minutes of 8/28/13 as presented. The motion carried 4-0. ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Hotel @ Block G SP/COA #Z-13252 (Krueger) 25 East Mendenhall Street * A Site Plan with a Certificate of Appropriateness application for the demolition of an existing building and construction of a 104 room hotel with related site improvements. Development Review Manager Krueger: Introduction of Project. This application is for the preliminary Site Plan approval. This is the proposed demolition of an existing building, the former Keyon Noble building, and the redevelopment of this parcel. Development Review Committee is recommending conditional approval of the application. The lighting aspects of the development were marked to be determined. The project is proposed as a 5-story hotel, standard streetscape, constructed to our downtown standards; height of building is in compliance with our height regulations. Tonight we are tasked with looking at the more qualitative aspects those related to the design guidelines, related to the esthetic qualities of the building, the character of the building, context of the building. This is the B-3 zoning district, the core of our community; the most intense development to be found here. There is a downtown improvement plan that was adopted as a sub area of our growth policy. This area is identified and projected as an intense development area. This project is in part of what is called the North Village, area in the plan that is focused on residential development, but doesn’t preclude any other types of uses. The parking garage is a key component of the project location in such that it will utilize garage for most of the offset parking for this project and has entered into an agreement with the city. The focus of tonight is to look at the positive aspects of the project. In the staff report we have outlined a few areas to focus on tonight. In general, the areas the staff focused on were, areas that we couldn’t find the project in conformance and many of those aspects are related to the fact that this project hasn’t been developed to the level of detail that we might typically see. In this case, the certain aspects are very important in the context of downtown, where the project is proposed in relation to specific site but the historical district downtown. What the expectations for hospitality are, uses in downtown, the quality of buildings downtown, and what the expectations of the permanence of the buildings downtown. At this time I will turn it over to Ms. Jacobs to walk you through some of the specific points that she has identified in the report. Associate Planner Pat Jacobs: I will share with you tonight the 9 greatest strengths of this project. One of the greatest strengths of the project is it’s an identified necessary use. The plans identified a boutique type hotel is a necessary feature for our downtown environment. We believe the intensity of the development is right on target, we believe the close proximity in relation to the parking garage is an asset to the structure. Because they are taking advantage of this garage right across the street they have reduced the onsite parking issue. They proposed a nice transitional use between the neighborhood to north and commercial use downtown. Another nice feature they are purposing is the intersection of North Black and Mendenhall they are offering a separate tenant space that is in a key location at a key intersection. They are also proposing a strong corner element. They have included in their application a varied material palate, it is not fully developed at this point, but there are varieties of materials that give various textures, colors and patterns that we feel will be an asset to the structure. They have some unique key design elements; we feel that is in character with some of the traditional elements in particular with hotel design. The activation of the alley is a strength with the intensity of use. A couple of things I will point out from the staff report. A couple of key things that come from the downtown improvement plan and a consideration of the board is the design of the structure and its sympathetic nature towards the downtown heritage. Location of greatest height in intensity we feel this design accomplishes this, the use of public space is important. Is the level of design to a level of permanence that is keeping with the traditional aspects of our downtown and on Main street. The intent of this building is that it will be here for number of years. And does the design reflect that same level of permanence you see on Main Street. One of the things that is identified in the North bubble as one of the things that is critical element is the pedestrian connection. Because this is an interesting point in-between downtown and the neighborhoods to the North we believe that the way this building addresses the pedestrian and how it brings someone from the neighborhood to the downtown makes the transition desirable. Now I will focus on items in the neighborhood conservation overlay. First thing I want to discuss the massing and the building form. What is called out in the conservation overlay is that simple rectangle solids are inappropriate. Building setbacks we are looking at and one thing in particular is the street edge. What is shown on Mendenhall for a drop off point, but we want to make sure as a staff is how they reinforce that strong pedestrian edge. Right now in particular we are seeing some planters and a wall. But creating that edge will become very critical as how we bring the pedestrian along Mendenhall. Other thing we look at is the staff believes it has a less intensive solid to void ratio. Materials, and what sense of permanence and quality what the building presents. How do these materials reflect the traditional character? As to the guidelines of scale, proportion texture and finish. Staff feels it has a strong palate of materials but do not have a lot of information about what those materials are or how they will be detailed which is critical information to decide if this building is of good design. There is some support parking in front and employee parking in the rear, again what we are looking for is a buffer and how well that parking in particular is buffered on Mendenhall. Looking at the layout of plan and looking at the service areas, but one of the things I had a discussion with applicant about was the support spaces such as the laundry, guest laundry, housekeeping, pool equipment, these spaces often generate noise, ventilation noise, smells these are kind of things that should be taken in consideration especially adjacent to pedestrian quarter and how that will be mitigated has not been presented to us at this time. The last point I wanted to bring to your attention was signs. At this time we don’t have any information on sign proposal. The sign package is a critical component to design. We don’t know how this will be integrated into the building design. Those are the primary points I wanted to draw your attention to. Brian, do you have anything additional? Development Review Manager Krueger: The only other aspect to this design we do not have an identified tenant for this building, but one of the things we do look at is who that tenant would be. We don’t have the detailed information of materials, and they may cover some of that in their report. It is important to look at the project in context for Bozeman. The other point that I would bring up is the design guidelines represent our community. Chairperson Michael Pentecost: Requested to hear from applicant Andy Holloran: I am with HomeBase, the developer of the project. We are thrilled to be a part of this project and fortune to have a location. As the developer of Block M, selfishly, we want to create a cohesive transition from Main Street throughout the north part of our community. When Pat spoke about materials, permanence, belonging, we want to belong here. We are going to own this project for a long time. We want it to add to quality and integrity of downtown. We have to apologize about our architect GH@ they are out of Oklahoma whom are not able to attend tonight. Intrinsick Architecture is an integral part of our design team. Utilizing downtown vendors is a key to success of the project. The plan is for a 4-story hotel with 104 rooms. Rob Pertzborn: Just to point out a couple things is there is a 7 foot setback on Babcock There is a vision triangle that we are dealing with we are allowed to encroach on the corner. We are waiting for the national identity to be announced before we get details of the signage out. Passed it on to Troy. Troy Scherer: Great to work with a team who allows for creativity, great rhythm and space. Regarding the buffering and sense of pedestrian entry and exist on Mendenhall. The interesting part is the glass front and façade of glass in back and the view through building and the fire pit and it makes it a place where you want to be these areas. Chairperson Michael Pentecost: Requested to bring it to members Mel Howe: no questions Bill Rea: Parking question for staff, what is the trigger to expand the garage? Development Review Manager Krueger: that would be for a person who is not here. I know there is a capacity threshold. There is also possibility of different site for a garage. Bill Rea: What is the HVAC approach to the road? Rob Pertzborn: It is going to be more of a PTAC system allows for efficiency in use, but is a tride and true process that upscale hotels utilize. Bill Rea: Why only 5 stories? Development Review Manager Krueger: The current allows a maximum of 70 feet. The only way to exceed that height is through a variance process. Mark Hufstetler: Yes, I have a few questions on different topics. What percentage of the parking capacity will be allocated between these two hotels. Development Review Manager Krueger: I don’t know it is managed by the parking garage committee. For the spaces available for lease, I know that as projects come on, the spaces are not spoken for until agreement is signed. I know we have one signed agreement. Mark Hufstetler: I am wondering about the pedestrian interaction with the building? It seems like there is only one entrance/egress point that is intended for that use. Rob Pertzborn: : There is a secondary access, on the East off of Black, the focal point is the main entry. We anticipate people coming from Tracy and Black. Mark Hufstetler: Is that entire block zoned the same way? Rob Pertzborn: It is zoned B-3 Susan gave Mark a zoning map for clarification Mark Hufstetler: How is the proposed design intended to look after dark? Rob Pertzborn: we haven’t played out all that as of yet. But explained some options Mark Hufstetler: I have to ask about the historical aspect of the existing building, and why the building is being discarded Development Review Manager Krueger: The simplest way to look at it is through the Demolition Section 1 of municipal code, the way the director interprets the section is we can’t accept an application without subsequent development or treatment and number two it says if the building is designated as intrusive or neutral or is not inventoried and is not within a district or other subject to review through the planner review standers and the COA standards. Chairperson Michael Pentecost: is there any plan or would there be any plan for any sort of connection/sky bridge to parking garage? In some way that you don’t have to go outside? Rob Pertzborn: If the city would consider a sky bridge we would welcome it. Can I see it down the road where someone says we need to do that? With the middle elevator it could be looked at in the future. Chairperson Michael Pentecost: What kind of impact is this going to have on the businesses to the west? The small auto dealership? Rob Pertzborn: Zoning lines??? Chairperson Michael Pentecost: aside from the fact it was not found to be a contributing building historically was there any consideration to adaptive use like the Fred Wilson building and maybe you can address the Fred Wilson building. Rob Pertzborn: When we originally looked at this project we couldn’t imagine starting from scratch. The building is at is maximum build out. The roof has no capacity for any additional weight, we exhausted a lot of time, money and energy to explore how to use it. Chairperson Michael Pentecost: you mentioned you were targeting a LEED certification any idea what level? Rob Pertzborn: Reality is we would love to be a LEED certified project, what in the design can we add to raise the certification level. It is a big goal of ours. Mel Howe: All I really have is it’s are really good looking project Bill Rea: Things I have great concerns are it feels like a motel on a hotel site. It’s a motor entry not a pedestrian entry. My suggestion would be to make it more set up for pedestrian. PTAC do not say anything historic, and the outdoor fire pit, if I was reviewing your LEED application and saw an outdoor fire pit, I would throw out you application. Who is going to sit out there when its 10 below zero? Unless it is on some sort of sensor. I would strongly support your sign; I think these thin sign off the wall is what building needs. I would like to see it taller and thinner, Good Project Mark Hufstetler: I like the corner element, suffers because there is no way to use it, its and obstacle for pedestrians; there are two competing architectural styles there is not a real sense of how that works from a pedestrian activity, if you take away that corner element what you have is something that belongs on 19th. One thing about building a project like this is encourages stronger pedestrian presence in the downtown core. The historical preservation disregards the spirit and intent of city code. HABS level Documentation? Chairperson Michael Pentecost: I would like to move to motion. We have members of the public that I would like to weigh in. (Someone motioned and seconded but I don’t know who) 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.} Pete Colvin: I have no problems what so ever. Sean Becker: could not hear first part of conversation, the signs and other details would come back another time? Development Review Manager Krueger: Yes the process has various steps and they could come back and ask for 5 more levels if they so chose. Mr.. Krueger clarified processes to Mr. Becker Chairperson Michael Pentecost: In general, I support, it is a perfect place for a hotel. I echo bill and Marks comments on PTAC units and even looking at the geothermal systems. Signage inside parking garage that directs towards entrances. On the downside of it, LEED certificate and the removal of concrete and rebar, where it will go, an adaptive reuse would been a powerful move. Motion from the board: Bill Rae: Makes recommend approval Z-13252 as presented by the staff. Mel Howe seconded motion. Mark Hufstetler: I would like to amend motion to amend and approve to require HABS level II All in favor ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB, the meeting was adjourned. Michael Pentecost, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board_______________________________________________