Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-13-1999 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1999 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Ed McCrone called the meeting to order, noting the new member, Melvin Howe, is in attendance. He asked the secretary to take the attendance. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present Dan Glenn Mara-Gai Katz Therese Berger Roger Cruwys Melvin Howe Henry Sorenson Andrew Epple Ileanna Indreland Ed McCrone Carol Schott Mike Delaney Dick Pohl Troy Bentson Joanne Mannell Noel ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JUNE 22, 1999 There being no minutes in the packets, they will be acted upon at the next meeting. ITEM 3, INFORMAL AGENDA A. Vosti/River Run Phase II Revisions #P-9761A/#Z-97178A - (Berger) Manley Road - An Informal Review for advice and comment on proposed revisions to the River Run Subdivision Pre-Application & PUD Concept Plan. Assistant Planner Therese Berger presented the application, noting that the applicant's representative, Roger Cruwys, would discuss the wetlands and proposed trail system in greater detail. Mr. Cruwys explained the Vosti PUD, including the preliminarily approved plat for the M-1 area to the south. He discussed the trail system throughout the PUD, and the transition from M-1 development to a mix of more dense residential development to the estate lots to the north among the more sensitive areas of the property. He noted the location of the wetlands, indicating the Army Corps of Engineers has determined that the wetlands to the southwest of the Phase II area are to be saved. He indicated that the barn will be saved and likely converted into a retail area along the lines of Kagy Corner. Mr. Cruwys described the looped road and the smaller drives with landscaped islands which will be treated like private drives. Planner Berger noted that the looped road will be a dedicated 60' right of way that will include sidewalks, curb, and gutter on both sides. Design Review Board Minutes-July 13,1999 1 Mr. Glenn stated he was unclear as to the use of the more dense residential areas and cautioned against the having the 5,000 square foot lots on the east side of the dedicated road front onto what will be treated as the rears of the four 4,000 square foot lots. In addition, he found it difficult to evaluate the trails. Mr. Cruwys explained that a recreational area will be installed in the entryway. Mr. Glenn asked if the units were fronting onto the roadway. Mr. Cruwys described the proposed trail connection through the industrial subdivision to the south to the subject property and the along the eastern boundary of the property to the north. He further described observation areas onto the more sensitive wetlands areas which will be closed to the public as they are a nesting habitat. Mr. Pohl asked if all of the lots can be developed given the delineation of the wetlands edge. Mr. Cruwys noted that building footprints will be limited on some of the lots along the southern edge of the development. Mr. Pohl relayed that he likes that the pedestrian crossings are proposed to be delineated. Responding to Mr. Pohl, Andy Epple noted that the Development Review Committee discussed the accessibility of the lots at the ends of hammerheads and determined adequate back up maneuverability will be required to be located on the property as it appears to be inadequate on the street. Mr. McCrone noted that DRB will see the Preliminary PUD Plan application, and commented that the proposal shows a unique and interesting use of the area. Ms. Noel asked if the garages would be off the alley in the pocket of denser lots to the west. Mr. Cruwys noted they would and the applicant plans to include front porches. He directed the Board's attention to the zero lot line concept and side yard patio concept being contemplated by the applicant, noted that the front setbacks in this area would be to City standards. Mr. Glenn noted there seems to be some contradiction in trying to be a quasi traditional neighborhood. He's not sure the whole property comes together as a whole. He feels there is a potential for certain elements of the development to be attractive to prospective home buyers. Responding to Mr. Glenn, Mr. Cruwys indicated there would be on-street parking in the two private loops and in front of the 5,000 square foot lots. He noted these private loops would likely be adjusted to approximately 43' to accommodate two 12' driving aisles and parking on both sides. Planner Berger explained that the City Engineer has stated that standard sidewalks will be required along the larger dedicated public right-of-way as well as boulevard, curb and gutter. Mr. Pohl asked how many of the trees will be saved. Mr. Cruwys noted the trees in the wetland areas and the conifers near the farmstead would be preserved. Ms. Noel noted concern with the denser pocket of 4,000 square foot lots to the west as the area appears to be very congested. She noted that in the attempt to produce a varied site plan, the site Design Review Board Minutes-July 13,1999 2 seems congested and suggested a more varied, curvilinear street. Perhaps widened private loops would provide some relief, as well as landscaping details. She added she likes that the 5,000 square foot lots are setback as well as the proposed landscape islands. Noting that the alleys appear to be treated more like a street, he expressed concern with the turning radii. Planning Director Epple noted that the alleys are proposed to be 25', which is wider than standard City alleys. Mr. Pohl suggested small greenways be included between some of the lots in that western end of the development for pedestrian traffic. He expressed concern that the trails and open space function and regarding access to the corner lots of the private drives. Mr. Glenn stated the proposal is a good effort to provide a mixture of housing types. However, he is not convinced that the plan achieves the goals that the applicant has set forth. He suggested that western pocket of denser lots with the alley pattern be continued onto another block to provide more cohesiveness. Rather than being an isolated anomaly in the development, the pattern should be repeated. He indicated that he is disturbed by the fact the four 4,000 square foot lots would have there rears facing the 5,000 square foot lots in the private loop. He is also concerned that many the 5,000 square foot lots in the western private loop face the alley. He suggested turning the block lot 90 degrees. Mr. Cruwys noted that the goal is to orient the houses in different ways, and to not use the traditional lot, block pattern. He felt that the newness of the homes, landscaping, the use of alternative fencing to ensure privacy will be addressed in design guidelines which will pass scrutiny. He added they will take a look at the turning the alley block. Mr. Glenn suggested that the strategy be to have the townhouse lots be served from the same roadway as the single family homes. Mr. Cruwys noted he is trying to eliminate as much pavement as possible. Mr. McCrone concurred with the ideas expressed by the Board and felt that the designer has addressed most of the concerns expressed by the DRB regarding the previous concept plan. B. The Marketplace aka Little Montana Building Informal #I-9921 - (Stafj) 711 East Main Street - An Informal Review for advice and comment on a proposed re-use for the Little Montana Transportation building. Mike Delaney joined the DRB. Planning Director Epple presented the proposal noting the idea is to reuse the Little Montana Building as a restaurant with most of the delivery being from Wallace Street. He noted the DRC had suggested the driveway approach be widened, and that street trees be moved back behind the sidewalk. Mr. Delaney stated the proposed first phase is to reuse the Little Montana Building for a restaurant with a brew pub. He suggested it would be a mecca for congregating people in the downtown area. It was noted that the sidewalk was located along the curb. Mr. Delaney noted Design Review Board Minutes-July 13,1999 3 the second phase is for a new building to be called the Marketplace. He discussed the brick construction and coloring, the intent to install landscaping, the intent to include colonnades. He described the grain bin location, and noted the goal is to create a festive area with a grocery store, pet store, candy store, etc. In the Marketplace. He noted the existing parking in front of the building will become a landscaped area. He noted that the different hours of the businesses will allow co-use of the parking spaces. Ms. Noel asked how extensive the restoration of the existing building will need to be. Mr. Delaney noted he has conferred with the Historic Preservation Officer, who indicated it is an historical structure and he would try to get it listed on the historical register. Mr. Delaney noted that the east 4/5's of the building is open inside. Ms. Noel noted she is pleased that the area will be rehabilitated. Mr. Pohl noted that the tree that exists is not worth saving as it is a seedling that has come out of the foundation. He commented on the grain bin proposal and asked about the rationale behind the use of an agricultural theme and not a railroad theme. Mr. Delaney noted there is also a railroad theme using rail wheels in the bar area. He noted the grain bin could be replaced with a water tower. DRB members generally agreed this would be a more appropriate design element for the project. Mr. Glenn stated the outdoor seating on the south side of the building should work well. Mr. Delaney noted the outdoor seating area is planned for use at least 8 months of the year with the addition of the awnings. Planning Director Epple noted that a prime example of restaurant seating in front with parking in the rear is the Applebee's restaurant on North 7' Avenue. Ms. Noel noted this building is part of an important entrance to the city. She stated these types of ventures have been very successful in other cities. Mr. Pohl asked about the use of metal plates in the fence that will block the people sitting in the patio from the view of the street. He suggested making the fence transparent, through the use of grill work or other means. Mr. McCrone concurred with the use of more transparent fence material. Planning Director Epple noted that the site is located out of the downtown historic district, which will help with the signage issues. Mr. Glenn noted this is a very well developed plan for an informal. Mr. Delaney noted the billboards will be removed. C. Jaramus "Lodginghouse" Informal #I-9920 - (Staff 419 West Dickerson Street - An Informal Review for advice and comment on a proposed "lodginghouse". Design Review Board Minutes-July 13,1999 4 Mr. Troy Bentson joined the DRB. Planning Director Epple presented the application, noting the large addition that had been added to the garage under a previous DRB review. He reviewed the permitting of the addition, and the current proposal for its use as a tourist house. He noted it is not meant as a monthly rental or a bed and breakfast. He noted there are no changes proposed to the exterior of the building. He stated the CUP will only need a cursory review by the DRB, since only minor, if any changes are proposed for the exterior of the buildings. He noted the main issue is parking for one additional vehicle, as required by code. Options include parking a vehicle in the existing workshop or getting an easement from a neighbor to park. Mr. Bentson noted he is comfortable with the two-family and tourist house definitions and he stated the proposed use is as a tourist house. Planning Director Epple noted that the lot is too small for two dwelling units. Mr. McCrone noted that the DRB also looks as health, safety, and welfare issues. The Planning Director suggested DRB give advice on the parking space location. Mr. Bentson noted the parking in the workshop would require a garage door. He noted he would have an engineer check the structural feasibility. He noted another method would be to ask for a deviation for the parking space to be waived altogether, but that the applicants did not want to request any deviations with this proposal. Planning Director Epple reviewed the previous applications for developments on this property and the problems that have been resolved. DRB members noted this use will have a lot less impact on parking than a two-family dwelling unit. Mr. McCrone suggested that DRB make a recommendation today as this is pretty cut and dried. Planning Director Epple noted he will check on code requirements for bringing CUP's back to the DRB. Ms. Noel asked if there have been any letters received. Planning Director Epple explained that for informal reviews, no noticing is required, but would be required in a formal review. Mr. Bentson stated scenario A for parking is equivalent to stacking. He noted there is just a little less space than that required for stacked parking. Planning Director Epple explained the setbacks required and the deviation that would be required for this scenario, and deemed it unacceptable from a planning standpoint. Planning Director Epple noted that if there are no design issues or code requirements for the DRB to review, or neighborhood comments, then the DRB wouldn't have to review this proposal again. The consensus of the Board was to not see the design again as long as the applicants do not use scenario A for stacked parking. Design Review Board Minutes-July 13,1999 5 For the Betterment of the DRB: Election of Officers - Consensus was to hold the election at the next meeting. ITEM 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the DRB, Mr. Pohl moved, Mr. Glenn seconded, to ad' e ting. otion carried unanimously. Ed McCrone Design Review Board Design Review Board Minutes-July 13, 1999