Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-31-1995 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - MAY 31, 1995 Members Present: Cliff Chisholm Mara-Gai Katz Kim Walker John DeHaas Roger Cruwys Staff Present: Therese Berger Lanette Windemaker Dave Skelton Visitors Present: Project Review - McKelvy COA Z-9565 Kim Walker noted that staff conditions #1 and #2 gave recommendations that would be a nice alternate visual effect. Planner Skelton said that the plans to alter the back door would match the roof line with the existing roof line. He stated that the applicant was a former stone mason and that he felt very comfortable with the first floor stone work. Cliff Chisholm stated that staff made a good point and when he looked at the drawing of the house he thought it looked a bit disjointed and feels it could work with attention to detail . He said it looks a bit like a wood house sitting on top of a stone house with the abrupt change in material and the second floor being somewhat larger. Cliff Chisholm stated that historically bracketing would balance it out and another option would be to look at the way it will be trimmed at the abrupt transition and if it needs some kind of trim as a heavier piece of wood. Planner Skelton stated he envisions it eventually on the north and south wall and that the applicant didn' t want to build just a simple box. He said they could create an extra 4' in the north and would south wall and will create planters that come right out of the footing. He noted the applicant intends to use cedar up above. Cliff Chisholm stated that more regularity in sizing and placing of windows would be beneficial with a simple shape more like that shown on the west elevation and the use of a regular spacing of windows . Planner Skelton stated he could see enlarging the north elevation windows . Cliff Chisholm agreed that the north elevation windows are too little. Planner Skelton stated the applicant will consider the comments and try to incorporate those suggestions . Planner Skelton thinks the finished product will add to the project . Kim Walker asked how wide the eave is on the roof line. Planner Skelton stated it is going to be manufactured truss and therefore doesn' t know what the width will be. Kim Walker stated that she would suggest a deeper eave. Kim Walker moved, seconded by Mara-Gai Katz , to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the construction of a new house and garage as per staff recommendations . The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote of the members present. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES - MAY 31, 1995 Members Present: Cliff Chisholm Mara-Gai Katz Kim Walker John DeHaas Roger Cruwys Staff Present: Therese Berger Lanette Windemaker Project Review — Cupola PUD Planner Windemaker reviewed the proposal and staff report, and asked that the Board consider the completeness of the architectual development guidelines . She noted deficiencies in the phasing plan and the reciept of 15 letters in opposition to the project. She indicated that the major concerns voiced in the letters are in regards to traffic impacts, the types of industrial uses, the loss of open space, and the effect on wildlife and the wetlands . Planner Windemaker read the developer's response to the staff report. Cliff Chisholm questioned the evaluation process in regards to the old structures on the site. Planner Windemaker explained that, most likely, pictorial records will be taken as well as the possiblity of the provision for of signage regarding the history of the site . Mara-Gai Katz confirmed with Planner Windemaker that the historical evaluation would be a condition of the project's approval . Cliff Chisholm asked for clarification regarding recommendations for the proposed housing units on the hill. Planner Windemaker remarked that the intent of the condition is to have the applicant provide some kind of buffer between the hillside residential units and the East Main Street development. Planner Windemaker noted the proposed parking and maximum building coverage and voiced concern that a minimum requirement for landscaped open space be established so that future developers are prevented from paving into what is now proposed as open space . She added that the developer is also asking to increase the maximum height of the buildings from 24 ' to 36 ' and to increase the number of dwelling units from 80 to 100 . Roger Cruwys voiced concern regarding the proposed biologic treatment of storm drainage. Planner Windemaker explained the proposed system and indicated that the Engineering Department would have to approve the final specifications for the system. Roger Cruwys confirmed with Planner Windemaker that the there would be no required time frame to complete the entire project. Planner Windemaker explained that required completion dates are typically required for improvements . She explained that the DRC would be conditioning the phasing to ensure adequate emergency 1 accesses and infrastructure are in place throughout the development. Planner Windemaker clarified that the land and open space would remain commonly owned by the "Owner's Association" , and only the footprints under the building units could be privately owned. Kim Walker confirmed with Planner Windemaker that the trails are proposed to be maintained by the "Owner's Association" . Roger Craft, applicant, remarked that the trails would be assesible to the public. Kim Walker questioned where all of the dirt would be moved. Planner Windemaker responded that, between the extension of Highland Boulevard and fill for the low elevation portion to the northwest of the site, most of the relocated soil should be utilized. Keith Swanson commented that the extension of Mendenhall, when developed, will look like a bank of earth paralelled by large buildings placed in stair step fashion. He continued that the multi-family dwellings will crest the top of the hill . He added that trees would buffer the expanse of the buildings and more vegetation would be provided along the western boundary. John DeHaas remarked that he feels the buffering and landscaping should be addressed in the phasing plan as development would be ongoing and could take years . Keith Swenson remarked that the hill would be flattened and the old existing structures would be removed. He indicated that the existing barn will be rebuilt as a feature of the development on the extended Highland Boulevard and features of an existing log house will be retained in Phase I near the train trussel . Keith Swenson explained that the dirt relocation will save a million dollars in construction costs for the extension of Highland Boulevard. Producing a diagram, he noted a series of pond systems proposed to provide habitat to fowl . He explained that roughly 22 acres is devoted to wetlands, and 6-7 acres of the site are functioning wetlands now. Roger Craft said that the wetlands development design is being coordinated with the U. S . Fish and Wildlife Department, the Department of Water Resources, the Department of Environmental Sciences and the Corps of Engineers . He indicated that Hawthorn School has had discussions with his team regarding utilizing the wetlands system as a lab area. Keith Swenson added that, in such case, there would be a written agreement with the school . Keith Swenson commented that the relocation of the sewer trunk line would coencide with the installation of the trail system. He explained that the trail would both function as an amenity and an access requirement of the City Engineer. Cliff Chisholm questioned the timimg of the wetland improvments . Roger Craft explained that those improvements would need to be done in the winter while the water levels are low. Keith Swenson remarked that they are not in disagreement with the request for a more detailed phasing plan; the changes and phases of development would need to be mitigated on an ongoing basis . He explained that the wetland and landscaped areas would be 2 the first line of biologic treatment of run-off and would intercept any kind of pollution before it gets into Rocky Creek and the East Gallatin River. Roger Cruwys voiced concern whether the proposed drainage system woould have the ability to adequately filter pollution without killing the landscaping. Keith Swenson explained that, short of a toxic spill, the technology is not new and has been used to eliminate all sorts of surface drainage. Keith Swenson commented that Planner WindemakerIs staff report offered good suggestions; however, he feels there is only one unresolved issue, that being the incorporation of a tot lot. He explained that the reason the development does not propose a tot lot is because the intent is not to attract families with small children to this living area. He added that the proposed daycare facility should accomodate any children who might live in the development. Keith Swenson said that there will be a design team employed by the "Homeowner's Association" to undertake the detailed design of the individual buildings . Cliff Chisholm questioned the building elevations . Keith Swenson explained that the elevation facing Mendenhall will have covered walkways, with the back side of the building exibiting a more industrial look. Roger Cruwys remarked that he has reservations about the scale of the structures and the needs of the uses . He voiced concern regarding residential units over industrial uses . Cliff Chisholm commented that the subject project has been in front of the Board several times, and that the basic concept of residential units over industrial units has been the same. He added that such a proposal is a continueation of a historic pattern on the north side and would also to create a more urban density in a town area. Roger Cruwys commented that he would rather the pedestrians have more separation from the street-scape and suggested the buildings take less of a direct lineal approach and allow for the possiblity of outdoor settings to accomodate restaurants . He suggested the applicant take another look at the contouring of the land so that less severe slopes fall away from the building pads . Kim Walker suggested that many of the concerns noted by the public may be the result of lack of knowledge rather than familularity with the project. She said that she likes the idea of breaking up the streets and pedestrian traffic. Kim Walker indicated that she is a little uncomfortable with the buildings themselves . She continued that, although she likes the idea of combining residential and inducstrial uses, she visualizes the residential units as being along the lines of artist studios . Kim Walker remarked that the biggest problem is for the Board to procede without architectural guidelines as half of what the Board is to review is not included in the submittal . She added that she feels she cannot make a discision on the proposal without seeing the architectural guidelines and that she is very leary of 3 leaving the architectural design completely up to an employed team of reviewers . She continued that part of condition #2 should include that this aspect of the project return to the DRB . Kim Walker questioned whether the Highland Boulevard extension will re-route truck traffic. Planner Windemaker remarked that her understanding is that when and if the truck route is established, it will be illegal to utilize alternate routes for through truck traffic. Mara-Gai remarked that she feels the structures should incorporate more articulation, and, as Roger Cruwys suggested, should allow for patio settings for bars or restaurants, necessary urban elements . She said that she doesn't see a reason to make such drastic changes to the land topography as there are other options for the site. Noting the concerns from the public, she commented that she would hope the developer ensures that every oportunity remains for the public to use the site as a recreation area. Mara-Gai Katz questioned the book referenced as a developmental guideline and indicated that it is disturbing to see such a large project lack the level of thought regarding the architectural guidelines as it seems to have taken regarding other aspects of the project . She added that she would not be comfortable recommending approval for the project without seeing the elevations again. John DeHaas remarked that he feels that the building designs will be critical to the success of the development. He suggested that an architect be included in the proposed employed design team and that the townhouses take advantage of the open space views rather than face the back of buildings along Main Street . He added that he strongly agrees with staff s condition regarding buffering. Cliff Chisholm remarked, that although it may be difficult to create architectural guidelines that work very well and cumbersom to deal with both the City and an employed review team, he feels adequate guidelines are necessary. He added that, although he feels the developer is contributing to the city in proposing the mixed use concept, he feels the building forms are stark and seem to suppress their purpose. Cliff Chisholm questioned the restoration and reuse of the barn and log strutures . Keith Swenson responded that the log structure will be integrated into a small office building and the barn would be at the foot of Mendenhall and could have a couple of uses, including an assembly faciltiy or restaurant. He added that the barn will be very visible from all three vantages to the site. Cliff Chishom remarked that, if the attempt is to build in the industrial character, he feels the buildings could take on more of an element of funkiness given the mixture of uses . He suggested they take on a more livlely character. Keith Swenson noted that there will be changes in materials and that the very strong pedestrian element of the design is not that visible in the submittal . MOTION - Cliff Chisholm moved, seconded by Roger Cruwys , to recommend approval of the project subject to staff conditions, with 4 the exception of condition #5, regarding the tot lot, as the applicant's argument seems sound. Mara-Gai Katz questioned whether the Board wished to modifiy condition #2 to include that the architectural guidelines be brought back before the DRB for final approval . Planner Windemaker noted that the applicant has offered to bring before the Board lighting and signage details . AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION - Cliff Chisholm moved, seconded by Roger Cruwys, to amend the motion to include that the architectual development guidelines, signage, and lighting be brought back before the Board for final approval . Both the amendment to the motion and the motion carried with a unanimous voice vote of the members present. 5 ATTENDANCE ROSTER Those persons attending the meeting are requested to sign the attendance roster. Please print neatly and legibly. NAME ADDRESS 3 . (_a.r�ci_ /015�1 GSA /70? r 4 . 5 . 6 . 72b Pc n)+ 7 . 8 . 9 . 10 . 11 . 12 . 13 . 14 . 15 . 16 . 17 . 18 . 19 . 20 . 21 . 22 . 23 . 24 . 25 .