Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-25-2000 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, JANUARY 25, 2000 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Ed McCrone called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. He welcomed Bill Hansen to the Board, and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present Ed McCrone (None) Therese Berger Mara-Gai Katz Melvin Howe Dave Skelton Harry Kirschenbaum Bill Hanson Carol Schott Frank Schledorn Dan Glenn Mike Gaflke Joanne Mannell Noel Dick Pohl Henry Sorenson, Jr. With the consent of the Board, Chairperson McCrone postponed the election of officers until the end of the meeting. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 9, 1999 Chairperson McCrone asked for corrections or additions to the minutes. Mr. Pohl suggested "boll" in the 51h sentence under Item 3, page 1, be changed to bollard. Mr. Pohl moved, Mr. Mel seconded, to approve the minutes as amended. The motion carried 6-0. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW Bozeman Inn CUP/Dev/Var#Z-99160 - (Berger) 1235 North 7'h Avenue - A Condition Use Permit Application with deviations and variances to allow the expansion of a non-conforming structure and restaurant serving alcoholic beverages, including the enclosure of the existing patio area, the removal of the existing pool, the construction of an rear enclosed pool addition, a 10' landscaping strip, and related site improvements. Assistant Planner Therese Berger introduced Mara-Gai Katz and Mike Gaffke. She reviewed the Staff report, including the deviations and variances requested. She stated Staff is in support of the variances, and noted one neighbor to the west has voiced concern with the noise that may not be abated with the use of removable glass panels for the patio addition. She reviewed the recommended conditions, noting the applicant has indicated the retaining wall feature required by ADR Staff is cost prohibitive and during this meeting they will offer some alternatives. Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 1 Discussion ensued on the planting of boulevard trees. Planner Berger noted Montana Department of Transportation (MDOT) discourages tree plantings in the boulevard for safety reasons and snow removal. She stated the applicant has offered to plant boulevard trees in the 10 foot planting strip in lieu of the boulevard. Planner Berger noted she didn't address the variance requests with the DRB as the City Commission will make the final decision on them, and the variances are for existing conditions. Planner Berger noted that there were concerns raised by the neighbor to the west in Royal Vista Subdivision about this business and potential noise. In response, Chairperson McCrone asked about details concerning when and how Bozeman Inn and Royal Vista were platted and how they were related. Planner Berger noted that all were part of the Royal Vista Subdivision. In response to Mr. Pohl, Planner Berger noted the driving aisles are adequate, and described the space lengths. She noted the number of parking stalls also has to meet code. She stated that once the City Commission approves a submittal, the applicants have 6 months to submit a Final Site Plan. In response to Mr. Hanson, Senior Planner Dave Skelton noted that condition #4 is an effort to retain the greenscape along the entryway corridor. He noted that previously DRB and Staff had indicated that alternating berming and retaining walls would best meet the corridor guidelines to screen the parking lot. He stated he is not recommending a continuous retaining wall to allow the parking lot to drain. Mr. Hansen noted there could be a real pooling problem due to the 1% slope in the parking lot. Responding to Mr. Sorenson, Planner Berger noted the City is requiring a sidewalk along Oak Street, which eliminates any space for landscaping along that street. In response to Mr. Pohl, Planner Berger noted the use of the outdoor seating area has been approved with a Special Temperory Use Permit since 1994. She stated sprinkling of the structure is a UBC requirement. Mr. Gaffke reviewed the progress since the project was first begun in 1996. He commended Ms. Katz and Planner Berger for bringing the project together. He stated the elimination of noise from the patio, moving the pool to the back, increasing parking, and improving the street frontage are his goals. He stated he is opposed to building a retaining wall along the street. He reviewed requirements which have changed since the last proposal, namely sprinklering the restaurant, the installation of a sidewalk along Oak Street, and screening the trash containers along the west side. He stated the current proposal for the patio enclosure is now for a permanent structure as opposed to the previous proposal for a canvas structure. Ms. Katz addressed the landscaping, stating the elevation is quite different from Fuddruckers as the highway is above that restaurant and there is a natural berm to shield car lights. She noted the parking situation at Simkins-Hallin is different and shouldn't be compared to this site. She stated the slope would be difficult to maintain, and objects to the condition for Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 2 berming and a retaining wall due to cost, as it would not to achieve the screening the City wants to achieve. She presented a plan to deal with the issue of screening, which meets the budget. Mr. Gaffke noted the patio setting will be maintained with removable windows for summer use to maintain the open air effect, however, they will work to contain the noise even in the summer. Ms. Katz described the snow removal area, which will be used for parking during the summer season. Chairperson McCrone asked if the applicants had any response to the conditions from Staff. Ms. Katz noted their response to condition #4 was the plan just presented. Mr. Gaffke noted they are offering to improve the screening by removing the chain link fence and installing a board fence. He noted the espresso stand is a private business and the owner doesn't want to move. He stated the stand is not currently using any of parking spaces, and the owner is requesting that she be allowed to remain on the site. Discussion ensued on the number of parking spaces required. The Board concluded that parking barely meets the 20% reduction allowed with a deviation without the espresso stand. In response to the Board, Planner Berger noted parking along the alley isn't feasible. She noted the espresso stand owner would have the opportunity to apply for a STUP after the site is completed and various components of the parking lot can be evaluated. Mr. Glenn suggested the applicant use colored pavers to differentiate parking areas from driving aisles. Mr. Sorenson asked if the curb stops would prohibit larger trailer pulling vehicles from pulling through the lot. Mr. Gaffke noted he doesn't plan to install curb stops, however, trailer towing vehicles currently park on the street or across the street. Mr. Sorenson discussed the softening effect of landscaping islands, and suggested congregating of the islands to create a larger landscaping area. Mr. Pohl stated landscape islands and wheel stops are necessary to identify where parking is located. Mr. Hanson asked if the applicant has considered using a double loaded parking with perpendicular parking next to the street. Ms. Katz noted she had experimented with that idea and there wasn't enough width, however, she would consider his suggestion. Planner Berger explained the difference between a variance and a deviation, in this instance a deviation of more than 20% fewer parking stalls changes it to a variance. Mr. Pohl suggested using more compact plantings between the taller plantings to achieve more density. Ms. Katz stated the plantings can be modulated. Mr. Gaffke noted they have tried to maximize the parking. Chairperson McCrone noted that there was a miscalculation in the number of parking spaces necessary to still qualify for a deviation, in actuality giving the applicant 2 more spaces. He was in agreement with the consensus of the Board and concerns about making the parking lot more useable and safer with the potential tradeoff of affecting code requirements for landscape islands, every 100 feet (by elimination of one or more of these islands). He noted that in the past Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 3 deviations such as this, have been recommended by the Board to the Commission, as tradeoff for safety concerns and good design. Noting that as this is an existing site with careful effort by the applicant to improve his site while satisfying present codes, and concerned about extra delay and expense for the applicant, Chairperson McCrone suggested there would be options for the applicant on how to proceed. These included resubmitting his application, implementing suggestions offered by the Board today and having another review or working it out with staff (with implementation of DRB suggestions). The applicant could also continue with the project as submitted. Mr. Glenn asked if the applicant had considered locating the landscaping and pool in front of the business and locating the parking in the rear. Mr. Gaffke noted the location of amenities in the structure. Planner Berger noted there isn't adequate space in the rear of the lot for parking. Mr. Hanson noted this is a tough site, and this proposal would be an improvement. He stated he would not recommend that the DRB require a new parking schematic. He is interested in a parking lot that works well; he suggested including compact stalls to improve the plan. He supports the applicant's deviation requests as the impacts would be negligible. He supports the requested variances. He suggested installing undulating plantings and modulating berming to improve the landscaping along the street. He noted a wall of plantings will be an ongoing problem with garbage blowing into it. Mr. Glenn suggested reconfiguring the southern corner for better traffic flow and using pigmented pavers to make the parking lot feel more like a plaza. Ms. Mannell-Noel noted the site will be enhanced by this proposal. She likes the green wall. She suggested removing the central island to help the traffic flow if the landscaping in the front is heavy. Mr. Pohl noted the parking lot is dysfunctional with one way traffic on one side of the lot and two way system on the other. He suggested integrating a full two way system even if parking is lost. He noted the evergreen hedge would be a significant improvement and better than a berm. He concurred with a modulation of the plantings and suggested other species of arborvitae. Mr. Sorenson suggested a recommendation to the City Commission to allow a few Iess parking spaces to get better traffic flow. He noted the hedge is a fine compromise for screening the parking lot from North 7`h Avenue. Mr. Howe noted he concurred with previous statements, then stated that berming or a wooden wall is unacceptable to him. He likes the plan presented today using an evergreen hedge. He'd like to endorse recommendation to the commission to allow fewer parking spaces. Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 4 Chairperson McCrone stated that since this is an existing site it has difficulties with complying with today's code. He commended the applicant on improvements to his site. He concurred with other Board members on the parking and landscaping suggestions. He feels the berming and wooden wall would be artificial. Planner Berger noted the Development Review Committee had no concern with circulation as proposed with the islands in place, and that the islands delineate traffic flow. Ms. Katz noted they object to the berm requirement in condition #4 as the strip of land is too narrow. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved to recommend approval of application #Z-99160, with support of the deviations and variance requests and Staff's conditions, and the replacement of condition #4 with "The applicant shall consider revising the parking arrangement to allow a two way circulation utilizing 90 degree parking stalls wherever possible", and adding condition #5 "The landscape screen shall consist of an undulating evergreen hedge of varied heights broken with boulevard trees along North 7`h Avenue as indicated on applicant's sketch L1 presented at the DRB meeting." Mr. Pohl seconded the motion. In response to Mr. Glenn, Planner Berger suggested his suggestion for colored pavers could be included in the staff report to the Commission. The motion carried 7-0. ITEM 5. INFORMAL REVIEW Cowdrey Parking Structure Informal - (Skelton) West side of South Grand, between West Main Street and West Babcock Street An Informal Review for comment and advice. Lowell Springer joined the DRB and explained the proposal. He noted the blacksmith shop has been removed and discussed the need for more parking for churches in the area, the school, and existing and proposed business. He stated the Parking Commission is in support of the parking garage. He reviewed the funding of structure. Mr. Glenn noted there is a critical need to bring housing and parking into the downtown area as part of a Smart Growth policy. He noted the one story structures built in the early 1900's were constructed to preserve a space for later vertical structures. As for the design, the 70's approach for separating parking from housing is unacceptable. He suggested submitting an integral structure with housing and parking combined. He stated the top floor could become open space for the housing units. He is not in favor of the wall effect along Grand Avenue. He noted there is a way to develop the image keeping the style and structure that exists. Mr. Springer noted the tower is impressionistic in nature, and he was trying to pick up the character of downtown. He noted it would be difficult to integrate tenant parking with cultural events. He noted there is parking for the housing units under the units. He stated the financing requires that the structure be separate from the housing units. (Mr. Glenn left the meeting.) Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 5 Senior Planner Dave Skelton reviewed the comments in Historic Preservation Officer Derek Strahn's memo. Mr. Springer noted the Parking Commission was very supportive of the proposal. Mr. Sorenson suggested the first floor of the tower and parking structure be devoted to commercial uses, and be zoned vertically in layers. He continued, the stair towers could be used as solid elements along the facade. He concurred with the Historic Preservation Officer's objection to the over use of Dry-vit-like materials. He suggested the whole tower should be covered with brick with delineation lines composed of other materials. He suggested including architecture elements from other tall buildings in the downtown. Mr. Springer noted the character of the old Story mansion contained a similar sloping roof lines as are indicated in the proposal. Mr. Sorenson commented it has the feel of an overgrown Victorian home. Ms. Mannell-Noel asked how the tower relates to the church steeple. Mr. Springer noted the height will require a variance or a code change. He stated several existing structures in the downtown area exceed the current height restriction. Ms. Mannell-Noel stated she objects to the height and the sheer mass of the tower. She feels it will obstruct the view of Holy Rosary Church from the east and totally overwhelm it. She concurred that brick should be used as much as possible. Chairperson McCrone asked if the two projects would be completed simultaneously. Mr. Springer noted they will as they depend upon one another economically. Discussion followed on the need for additional landscaping. Mr. Pohl noted that the tower will cast a long shadow on the street, and suggested adding a plaza on the south elevation as people space. He suggested adding interior landscaping in the tower. Mr. Springer stated there is a plan for a blacksmith sculpture with possibly a waterfall and landscaping. Mr. Hansen stated that a parking structure could add to the fabric of downtown. He suggested looking at the one in Missoula, pulling the structure away from the street to add landscaping, and adding compact parking spaces. He noted the fabric of the mass bothers him. He added the fenestration and texture on the lower layer is very inhuman. He noted the plans for the building as it rises duplicates the plan below, and asked that the exterior modulate. He asked for better fenestration, however, exterior balconies are not desirable or safe. He suggested a different roof form be considered, perhaps similar to the Bozeman Hotel or the Baxter Hotel. He feels the scale of the tower will dwarf the church and the Rectory. Mr. Springer noted he feels the scale and roof concerns can be addressed within the proposed footprint. Mr. Hansen suggested Mr. Cowdrey spend what it takes to do it right. Planner Skelton noted the two functions, though separate, are difficult to isolate due to their related uses. He stated the Historic Preservation Officer is recommending the use of more historic surfacing, authentic materials, and historic features. Mr. Hansen asked that the first floor and the roof be connected by a homogenous facade. Mr. Howe stated this is a good concept plan and he likes the roof structure. He noted the Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 6 front elevation is very symmetrical and similar to other hotels in the downtown. He concurred with the suggested substantial use of brick, but understands the costs involved compared to Dry-vit. Chairperson McCrone concurred with the subsequent suggestions for the use of different materials on the exterior. Mr. Springer asked DRB for their opinion on making the Dry-vit look like sandstone or other materials, noting he is not in favor of using fake materials. He noted the next step is to get the churches to agree to the financing. He asked to come back before this Board at least two more times, informally. Chairperson McCrone encouraged him to do so. ITEM 2. ELECTION OF OFFICERS - moved from its original placement to the end of the agenda. Chairperson McCrone called for nominations for Chairperson. Mr. Hanson asked if Mr. McCrone and Mr. Sorenson if they each would consider continuing as Chairperson and Vice- Chairperson respectively. Both indicated they would serve another term. NOMINATION: Mr. Hanson nominated Mr. McCrone as Chairperson and Mr. Sorenson as Vice-Chairperson. Mr. Howe seconded the nomination. Nominations ceased. The nomination carried unanimously. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT There bei further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 P. E cCrone, Chairperson Design Review Board Design Review Board Minutes-January 25,2000 7