Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-12-1999 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY,JANUARY 12, 1999 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Kim Walker called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. She directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present Ed McCrone Mara-Gai Katz Debbie Arkell Kai Tang Kim Walker Roger Cruwys Therese Berger Dan Schmidt Walt Willett Carol Schott Gene Cook Henry Sorenson Dave Rutledge Bill Hanson ITEM 2. MINUTES OF DECEMBER 22, 1998 (not available at this time), AND JANUARY 12, 1999 ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEWS A. Big O Tire CUP/COA#Z-98215 -(Killehrew) 620 North 7th Avenue A Conditional Use Permit Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a 4,508 sq. ft. retail/service facility relative to an automotive tire facility. (Open& Continue to January 26, 1999) Chairperson Walker noted the application is to be opened and continued. Mr. McCrone moved, Mr. Hanson seconded, to open and continue application#Z-98215 until January 26, 1999. The motion carried 4-0. B. Me& Jan's Minimart COA/DEV#Z-98198 (Sherman) 919 West College Street - A Certificate of Appropriateness Application with Deviations to allow the construction of a 24'X 24' canopy over the west pump island, as well as a change of signage. (Continued from December 22, 1998) Dave Rutledge joined the DRB. In the absence of Planner John Sherman, Assistant Planning Director Debbie Arkell presented the application. (Walt Willett joined the DRB.) She noted that typically the COA would be reviewed by Staff, however, due to the request for deviations, the DRB is required by the Municipal Code to do the review. Mr. Rutledge explained the proposal for the canopy, noting the reasons for the variances is the signage must be brought into compliance as a condition of approval for the canopy addition. Chairperson Walker reviewed the concerns of the last meeting on this project. Discussion Design Review Board Minutes-January 12,1999 1 followed on the location of the proposed monument sign within the sight triangle,the height of the sign, the possible replacement of the monument sign with a pole sign,the height and size maximums of a pole sign,the cars parked along the street blocking the sight triangle more than a sign would, the justification for the sign, Conoco's requirement that corporate signage be used, and the placement of a pole sign in a different location within the sight triangle. Chairperson Walker asked what would happen if a smaller pole sign were proposed. Planner Arkell noted that a pole sign is not permitted in the 13-1 district and such a change hasn't been advertised, so it can't be decided upon today. Chairperson Walker asked Mr. Rutledge if he would be in favor of re-advertising for a smaller pole sign. Mr. Rutledge noted another month wouldn't be a problem and he would rather have a pole sign. Planner Arkell noted it would have to be a minimum of 8 ft from the ground and a maximum of 13 ft high. Chairperson Walker noted she would be in favor of him keeping all of the wall signs with a deviation. In response to Chairperson Walker's question, Planner Arkell noted the deviation for a smaller pole sign would require a new application. Mr. Sorenson asked that the record show the DRB is in favor of the application, with the exception of the low profile sign, and that DRB would support a pole sign. Mr. Hanson suggested approving the application, with the monument sign not supported as a taller sign of specific dimensions would work better. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved, Mr. Willett seconded,to approve the application with an added sentence to condition#I: "The DRB would support a deviation to allow a pole sign in lieu of the monument sign with a maximum of 13 feet in height with a minimum clearance at the bottom of 8 feet, and it must meet other requirements of the sign code." The motion carried 5-0. C. Grand Teton Plaza MiSP/COA- (Arkelo 810 North 7"Avenue - A Minor Site Plan/COA Application to remodel and add on to the Sunset Motel, and convert it to retail uses Kai Tang joined the DRB. Assistant Planning Director Debbie Arkell presented the application, noting Staff is recommending conditional approval with 9 conditions. She noted if the building encroaches in the side yard setback, the applicant will be required to apply for a variance. She reviewed the conditions imposed on the project by the DRC. Chairperson Walker asked if Planner Arkell measured the existing trees to determine if they are in sight triangles or planned driveways. Planner Arkell noted they don't appear to be in the way, however, she hasn't measured the distances. Mr. Willett asked about the condition requiring the hedge to extend to the street behind the back parking lot, noting he would leave the hedge as shown on the site plan. Planner Arkell noted that the Code requires that parking lots be screened from residential areas. Design Review Board Minutes-January 12.1999 2 Discussion followed on the ability of the residents of the trailer park to walk to the stores, the need to relocate the bike rack, the extension of the sidewalk in front of the building to the future location of the sidewalk on North 7,h Avenue, the sidewalk requirement along North 7", and the color scheme for the building. Mr. Hanson noted he supports Staffs recommendations. Mr. Sorenson noted the building design is awkward, however, the site is difficult. He noted it is an improvement to the area and the addition of sidewalks is an improvement. He supports Staffs conditions. Mr. McCrone agreed with Staffs conditions, however, suggested condition#7 be amended to require the existing trees to stay, unless they are in a proposed driving or parking area. He agreed that the sidewalk along the north side should be extended to North Th Avenue, and that the lilac hedge shown on the site plan is enough. He noted this project is a major improvement to the site. Planner Arkell noted that headlights of vehicles may shine into the residential area if the hedge or some other screening isn't extended as in Staffs condition. Mr. McCrone retracted the idea of not extending the hedge. Mr. Willett noted anything done to the site will be an improvement. Mr. Tang asked if he had to have two handicapped parking spaces. Planner Arkell noted that two are required by the Code. Chairperson Walker noted there isn't much ground cover required, to which Planner Arkell responded that condition#9 requires more. Chairperson Walker moved, Mr. McCrone seconded, to conditional approval project#Z-98213 with an amendment to condition#7 deleting"if possible" and adding "if they are not in the proposed drive aisle or parking area" and the addition of#10 to read: "The sidewalk in front of the north side of the south building shall be extended from the current bike rack to the sidewalk on North 7 h Avenue." Mr. Sorenson noted that this application is rather incomplete and there are a lot of conditions, then suggested the DRB see the application again. Mr. Willett noted is shouldn't be necessary as Planner Arkell knows what the thoughts of the DRB are and will judge the final site plan accordingly. Chairperson Walker concurred. Mr. Hanson noted that he concurs with Mr. Sorenson that the site plan is not accurate and the DRB doesn't know if there will be a variance required. Planner Arkell noted she has no problem bringing the final site plan back to the DRB. Mr. Hanson noted he is comfortable with Planner Arkell's evaluation of the final Site Plan. The motion carried 5-0. Design Review Board Minutes-January 12,1999 3 D. Comfort Inn MaSPICOA#Z-98212 - (Berger) 1370 North 71h Avenue - A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the construction of a 44 room, 22,350 sq. ft. addition to the existing Comfort Inn and related site improvements. Gene Cook and Dan Schmidt joined the DRB. Assistant Planner Therese Berger presented the application, noting there are no deviations requested and no public comment has been received. She indicated that staff is recommending that both the espresso stand and storage shed be removed prior to final site plan approval. The owner of the stand has not obtained a Special Temporary Use Permit and the shed was to be removed as a condition of approval for the 1993 additions. Ms. Berger reviewed concerns of the DRB during the 1996 review and noted that staff is also recommending unmet conditions of the 1993 review be completed prior to final site plan approval. Mr. Cook noted they usually have 12-15 parking spaces in excess of what is used. Planner Berger noted she is comfortable with the general parking layout shown. Chairperson Walker asked if the applicant has a problem with the conditions. Mr. Cook and Mr. Schmidt indicated they have no problems with the conditions. Chairperson Walker asked for an explanation of the condition requiring windows on the north and south elevations. Planner Berger explained what she envisions. Mr. Willett noted the window placement for the south elevation as depicted in Exhibit C won't work as they will be located on the stairs. He suggested adding just two matching windows at the landings in the stairwell on the south elevation and that the metal roof canopy on that elevation extend to the first stairwell window. He also suggested the windows proposed on the north elevation are fine. Upon clarification, further discussion, and in acknowledgment of the applicant's concurrence, Board members generally agreed with staffs recommendation concerning the north elevation and with Mr. Willet's suggestions for changes to the south elevation. Chairperson Walker noted that she would like Planning Staff to always include condition#3 of Mr. Sherman's architectural review, pertaining to final site plan requirements, in every set of conditions. Discussion followed on the landscape island pavers recommended by Planning Staff, Chairperson Walker moved to conditionally approval application#Z-98212 with staff conditions 1-7, with the following change to condition#8: delete "and the second section from the eastern corner of the south elevation", and the addition of condition#9 to read: "Two matching windows shall be added at the landings in the stairwell on the south elevation and the three smaller windows shown in this wall section shall match the existing windows. The metal roof canopy on the south elevation shall extend to the first stairwell window as depicted in an exhibit provided by planning staff." Mr. McCrone seconded the motion, which carried 5-0. Design Review Board Minutes-January 12,1999 4 ITEM 4. ADJOURNMENT For the Betterment of the DRB: Discussion followed on maintaining a quorum, recruitment of new Board members, plans of current members whose terms are expiring,recruitment of new members, required make-up of the Board, residence requirements for members,the ability of the Planning Office to send out a letter to prospective members if the City Attorney approves, and how to contact people. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Kim Walker, hairperson, Design Review Board Design Review Board Minutes-January 12,1999 5