HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-28-2000 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2000
COMMISSION MEETING ROOM, CITY HALL, 411 EAST MAIN STREET
3:30 P.M.
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Chairperson Ed McCrone called the meeting to order at 3:43 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the
attendance.
Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present
Ed McCrone Melvin Howe Katina Christopher Russell Skelton
Dick Pohl Joanne Mannel Noel Jami Morris Hal Rainey
Jim Raznoff Dan Glenn Chris Saunders
Henry Sorenson Bill Hanson
ITEM 2. CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
Aspen Motors CUP #Z-0021- (Morris)
920 West Main Street
► A proposal to replace a gas station with used car lot. The lot is currently in operation
under an STUP.
Mr. Russell Skelton and Mr. Hal Rainey joined the DRB. Planner Morris presented the staff report,
including ADR staff recommendations, and distributed a letter from neighbor that stated her desire to
keep the chain link fence, rather than installing a hedge. Staff supports the project, noting the four
conditions indicated in staff report.
Chairperson McCrone noted that the property previously operated as a service station, and the use hasn't
changed. He asked for clarification on necessary deviations. Planner Morris explained that the review
process was necessary since it is for the operation of two separate businesses, one of which is a
conditional use and fitrther explained the deviations. Chairperson McCrone noted this proposal is a major
improvement he doesn't feel proposed use is much different than previous use.
The Applicants asked for a recommendation of what to put in lieu of a fence. Chairperson McCrone
noted that screening from residential areas is important and that there are code regulations for screening
along property with residential adjacency. Mr. Raznoffnoted that resident ingress, through gate in her
chain link fence, to her garden is through the applicants property. Mr. Pohl noted his concern that in
future, hedge will not be sufficient for screening; he felt a six foot high privacy fence is crucial in addition
to a planting in form of the fence, although this is not the wish of current resident. Mr. Sorenson
concurred with Mr. Pohl on the privacy fencing. Mr. Raznoff asked for clarification on the location of
the privacy fence in relationship to the hedge. Planner Morris responded that the fence would be to the
south of the hedge. It was also noted the Co-op fence is located on the applicants property.
Discussion followed on the landscaping. Planner Morris noted the MDT does not approve of the
proposed Thornless Honey Locust and the City Forester has recommended Black Ash as a replacement
Minutes of March 28,2000 DRB Meeting--Page 1
species. Mr. Pohl noted there are many ash in Bozeman and he would like to see more diversity.
Chairperson McCrone noted that for deviations to be approved, there are often trade-offs with
landscaping and design. He noted landscaping points above and beyond the requirement helps the DRB
to recommend approval to the City Commission. Planner Morris noted she would check the landscaping
points. Mr. Pohl complimented the applicants on their landscape plan; he thinks it will enhance display
area and noted it is an improvement on what was previously there. Mr. Sorenson questioned why the
applicants proposed paving the entire boulevard, rather than installing grass. Applicants responded that
they would like to see grass grow, but in the event they are unable to maintain the grass, could they pave
the entire boulevard. Mr. Pohl concurred with staff that grass in the boulevard is the preferred option,
and feels that with appropriate irrigation and maintenance, turf should be able to grow in that space. He
noted that if grass is not possible, pavement would be acceptable, but adequate tree well space must be
provided for the boulevard trees.
Mr. Sorenson noted awkwardness of handicap space. The applicant explained how the van accessible
parking space/drop-off area ended up where it is. Mr. Sorenson suggested adding a landscaping island
near the handicap drop-off. Applicant noted space is a factor. Mr. Pohl noted that this area would be a
great place for signature trees, aspens. Mr. Raznoff noted that for a pedestrian the landscaping island
would be in the way, but agrees that it could help with traffic circulation. Applicant noted he could add
sidewalk in that area instead of landscape island. Mr. Pohl questioned staff and applicants on circulation.
The applicants explained the circulation flow.
Mr. Sorenson noted small retention area. Mr. Skelton responded that the size of the retention area is not
Iarger than it was previously, but the small size is sufficient for the site.
Mr. Pohl moved, Mr. Sorenson seconded to approve the recommended conditions as furnished by
Planning Staff, to include the modification of condition# 1 that should read grass instead of gravel in the
right of way. The motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Sorenson moved, Mr. Raznoff seconded to approve the CUP based on recommendations that were
just approved. The motion carried 4-0.
ITEM 3. ZONE CODE REVISIONS - (Saunders) - continued
0. Review of proposed amendments to the provisions relating to design review.
Discussion on setbacks; concluded changes were directed by Commission. Noted Historic Mixed Use
District has a lot of potential. Chris noted it is an available zoning designation, neighborhood can come
with petition, go thru standard ZMA review process. Noted was originally proposed for use in north and
east sides of town.
Discussion followed on the size requirements of trees. Mr. Pohl noted there was a reference to 2" caliper
trees on page 120. Planner Saunders noted minimum standards changed from 1" to 1-1/2". Mr. Pohl
was concerned that the jump from 1-1/2" to 2" results in price increase by$100 per tree. He feels this
expense discourages residential property owners planting trees. It was also noted the City Forester has
final say in boulevard tree species.
Discussion followed on the changes to the PUD chapter. Planner Saunders noted rather than listing
Minutes of March 28,2000 DRB Meeting--Page 2
submittal information two times, the information is listed in the general site plan submittal criteria, and
states to refer back to this section for PUD submittals, eliminating redundancy. Chairperson McCrone
questioned if the amendments simplify the process; Planner Saunders noted that there are not significant
changes in submittal requirements since PUDs are a version of a site plan, but the principal change is to
simplify the PUD process. He noted under the proposed changes when applying for a PUD the zone
code, in it's entirety, is binding, but the applicants have the opportunity, through the deviation process, to
deviate from the code up to the standard, allowing applicants to maintain flexibility and do creative
things. Planner Saunders noted that future applicants will need to provide an explanation only for the
deviations from the code, rather than an explanation for everything as is currently required. He noted
these changes should decrease paperwork, allow the applicants to be more creative and allow the
applicants and planning staff to focus on what is unique. The amendments will also provide a better
review because of time previously spent on redundant information. Planner Saunders concluded these
changes will increase predictability, reduce the volume of information to be submitted and the
corresponding expense, make it easier for the public, Staff, Commission, and Applicant to use the
process.
Chairperson McCrone noted underlined changes in public notification requirements for commercial
changes in use. Planner Saunders replied this particular change was public-directed.
Planner Saunders noted the proposed amendments will go before the City Commission on Monday, April
3 at 7:00 p.m. He also noted that there will be further changes in the fall after the completion of the
Bozeman 2020 Master Plan update. Chairperson McCrone reminded the Board members to make
recommendations and pass them on to City Commission and Planner Saunders.
ITEM 4. MINUTES
Chairperson McCrone edited noted Item 7, 3`d paragraph to delete "that they don't like." Mr Sorenson
noted changes to Item 6, page 4, next to last paragraph, delete 4' sentence, replace it with"The
topography of this lot is the most erratic of the larger parcel. Deviations from a grid might be appropriate
in such situations. It would be best to plan the general infrastructure of the larger plot to make the most
of the potential of the site." He also added the word"public" before uses in the 5' sentence, same
paragraph, as well as deleted preschools and daycares and replaced with "trails and other public services"
It was moved by Mr. Pohl, seconded by Mr. Raznoff to approve the minutes, as amended. The motion
carried 4-0.
ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:13 p.m.
Ed McCrone, Chairperson
Design Review Board
Minutes of March 28,2000 DRB Meeting--Page 3
ATTENDANCE ROSTER
MARCH 28, 2000
Those persons attending the Bozeman Design Review Board meeting are requested to sign the
attendance roster.
PLEASE PRINT neatly and legibly.
NAME ADDRESS
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.