Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-8-2004 DRB DESIGN REVIEW BOARD WEDNESDAY,DECEMBER 8, 2004 MEETING NOTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Dawn Smith called the meeting to order at 3:35 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Staff Present Randy Carpenter Jami Morris, Associate Planner Dawn Smith Chris Saunders, Associate Planner Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Visitors Present ITEM 2. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 10,2004 Chairperson Dawn Smith continued the minutes of November 10, 2004 until the next meeting date due to the lack of a quorum. ITEM 3. U.D.O.Edits Discussion A. Discussion of the U.D.O. text amendments pertinent to the DRB. Chairperson Smith stated she was completely offended and felt disrespected because of the requested U.D.O. edit#219 as no one had broached the edits with the DRB prior to the amendments being sent to all the boards and commissions. Planner Saunders responded that, shortly after the adoption of the U.D.O., there were people in the public who felt there had not been enough public involvement in the creation of the U.D.O. ordinance. He stated that the City Commission initiated the process to submit proposed edits. Some edits came from Staff and some from private individuals. He noted that edit#219 has not been sanctioned by anyone other than the person who submitted it. He stated at this point Staff had identified which edits pertained to which boards and sent only those edits to each board. He stated the edits were preliminary; all will be forwarded to the City Commission with the recommendation from each applicable board whether or not the edit should be considered further. He added that the shorter list, resulting from City Commission consideration, would eventually become an official application to formally amend the U.D.O. and, even then, some of the edits might not be included in the final approval. Mr. Carpenter asked who comprised the U.D.O. group which requested most of the edits. Planner Saunders described the participants. Chairperson Smith stated she was offended by recommended edit#219. Mr. Saunders responded the edit comment was not specifically aimed at the DRB members, but the board itself. Chairperson Smith responded that there had never been a project that had been completely stalled due to the DRB. She asked what it meant that the edit appeared in the U.D.O. amendment text, Planner Saunders responded it meant only that the edit was received. City of Bozeman Design Review Board Minutes—December 8,2004 1 Mr. Carpenter asked if the DRB had discussed comments for this particular edit. Chairperson Smith responded that no one had attended prior meetings and the topic had not been discussed. Mr. Saunders stated the DRB could spend time commenting on only those edits of most concern to the DRB and not comment on everything. The extent of their comments was at their discretion. Chairperson Smith stated she thought the U.D.O. group was the Design Objectives Plan committee of which Mr. Livingston was a member. Planner Saunders responded the Design Objectives Plan committee was for a separate document. Mr. Carpenter suggested the DRB continue the discussion and make a general comment regarding the value of the DRB and their active suggestions. Chairperson Smith stated she had difficulties understanding the language of the requested edits as there was no comparable text listed on each edit. Planner Saunders stated some of the proposed edits were confusing. Planner Saunders stated there was a stealth issue in item#37 and the DRB had not received the item as it had not been obvious that it pertained to them. He noted the additional item would require ADR and DRB review on all Neighborhood Conservation Overlay and Entryway Corridor Overlay projects. Chairperson Smith stated that Associate Planner Jami Morris had told them that no project in the Entryway Overlay Corridor that was below 30,000 square feet would be reviewed by the DRB and she had not previously been aware of that change in the ordinance. Chairperson Smith stated the D.O.P. had good examples and, if the plan did not show bad examples, people would not be tempted to try to use them. Mr. Carpenter stated the structure of the text and the illustrations made the D.O.P. a very good document that was easy to use. Chairperson Smith stated the landscaping photos were excellent even though they were not from the area. Mr. Carpenter asked if the D.O.P. would be printed on nicer, more photo friendly paper. Planner Saunders responded that the next phase would expand the document to include the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District and the print quality of the document would be better. Mr. Carpenter asked for Planner Saunders to reiterate how the U.D.O. edits were requested. Planner Saunders explained that the City Commission had initiated the Zone Code Amendment and opened the process to the public. He indicated that many edits came from a group or individual. Chairperson Smith stated she agreed with the edits concerning the B-P Zoning District. Planner Saunders responded that the person submitting those edits had been trying for fifteen years to change the zoning on their property to accommodate commercial development and had been turned down by several commissions. Mr. Carpenter stated it would be helpful to discuss a few U.D.O. edits at each meeting. Chairperson Smith added that she was unfamiliar with many of the edits proposed. Planner Saunders stated that if the DRB did not feel strongly, yes or no, on individual edits they did not need to comment on the particular edit. City of Bozeman Design Review Board Minutes—December 8,2004 2 Chairperson Smith stated it would be nice to see all the signs the same size despite the size of the building. Planner Saunders responded there were a number of parameters determining the size and style of proposed signage. He added there were disputes as to whether or not projecting signs were the best. Chairperson Smith asked if there was a time frame for the edits. Planner Saunders responded the Planning Board would need to have comments by February 14, 2005. Chairperson Smith asked the difference in projects that are reviewed by the Zoning Commission/Planning Board and the Design Review Board. Planner Saunders responded that the Planning Board reviewed Growth Policy Amendments & Subdivisions, and the Zoning Commission reviewed Zone Map Amendments &Zone Code Amendments. Chairperson Smith stated the Planning Board was the board she had seen carry the duties of the DRB when there wasn't a separate board. Mr. Carpenter asked what Planner Saunders thought about the design review process itself. Planner Saunders responded that the applicant got out of the review process only what he/she put into it. He stated it was subjective when talking about the design of the projects and even the best intentioned people ended up in disagreement. Chairperson Smith stated conflict would arise when someone involved was unsure of the policies and procedures involved. Planner Saunders stated the updated D.O.P. gave more specificity in giving the intent of the language. Chairperson Smith stated the person spearheading the demise of the DRB was an active member of the Planning Board. Planner Saunders noted that the U.D.O. group had several persons who submitted edits on behalf of the group. Mr. Carpenter stated the Planning Board was polarized right now. Planner Saunders responded that some members had resigned from the board when they realized how much work was involved with board duties. Chairperson Smith asked how the City defined a block. Planner Saunders responded a block was bounded by streets, but there was a rough measurement (200 by 400 feet) depending on the land features involved. 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 available for comment. ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further comments from the DRB,the meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m. .t Av Dawn Smith, Chairperson City of Bozeman Design Review Board City of Bozeman Design Review Board Minutes—December 8,2004 3