Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-13-2001 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2001 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Vice Chairperson, Jim Raznoff, called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. and the secretary recorded the attendance. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Bill Hanson Henry Sorenson Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Jim Raznoff Joanne M.Noel Karin Caroline, Assistant Planner Dan Glenn Jeff Monroe,Assistant Planner Melvin Howe Jennifer Willems,Recording Secretary Dick Pohl Dawn Smith VISITORS PRESENT Christopher Nixon Jon Gerster Dean Center Kelly LeBlanc William Hicks Chad Malcott Erin McHenry ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JANUARY 9, 2001 Acting Chairperson Jim Raznoff, asked for comments or concerns of the meeting notes. Hearing none,he called for a motion. MOTION: Mr. Howe moved, Mr. Hanson seconded, to approve minutes as presented. The motion carried 7-0. ITEM 3. CONSENT ITEM Family Walk-In Clinic MaSP/COA- #Z-01013 - (Skelton) 120 North 19th Avenue A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the renovation of an existing structure, the construction of a 7424 s.f. office complex, and related site improvements. Kelly LeBlanc and Dean Center joined the DRB. 1 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 Assistant Planner Jami Morris presented the consent item and asked for questions of the DRB. Ms. Smith asked Planner Morns to explain what"Consent Item"meant. Planner Morris explained what "Consent Item"meant and how it is handled by the DRB. Planner Morris asked the DRB if further discussion was needed on the consent item. Mr. Hanson asked about the memo from Apogee Architects. He stated the memo stated that Apogee Architects was in general agreement with the modifications to the west elevation of the building. He asked if this meant that they were going to work with staff and the Planning Director to come up with an amendment with the modifications. Planner Morris stated the applicant will have options to appeal the conditions at City Commission, she noted the applicant had not submitted any drawings for the DRB to review. Kelly LeBlanc stated they are still continuing to work on the plans. Mr. Hanson suggested there was a general lack of detail on the west elevation. Mr. Glenn interjected and asked about the minutes presented. Vice Chairperson Raznoff stated there had already been a motion which was to approve the minutes as presented. Mr. Glenn stated he understood that but noticed there was no mention of the comments he had made. He suggested all the meeting minutes pertained to was a"blow out meeting". Recording Secretary Jennifer Willems, stated the minutes had been edited by the Planning Director before they were given to the DRB Board. She stated she would go over the tapes again and re-submit a draft copy of the minutes. Associate Planner John Sherman, stated there had not been a finalization of the minutes. Mr. Glenn asked why the minutes had been edited. Vice Chairperson Jim Raznoff, stated he would bring the conflict with the minutes again at the end of the meeting, to decide whether the motion of approval on the minutes needed to be re-addressed. Vice Chairperson Jim Raznoff, asked the Board to entertain a motion to consent to the Family Walk-In Clinic. He asked if there was any other discussion on the consent item. Mr. Howe stated the idea of"consent", is the idea that the planners handle the project. MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved,Mr. Howe seconded,to have the consent item handled by the planner. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW Antique Mall MiSP/COA/DEV-#Z-01014 - (Caroline) Move to open and continue to March 27, 2001 612 East Main Street A Minor Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness and Deviations, to allow the remodel of the existing 14,000 s.f., to accommodate four new office spaces and related site improvements. Planner Caroline apologized to the DRB for not getting the plans to the members before the meeting. She stated initial thoughts were that the project did not have to go before the DRB. 2 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 Planner Karin Caroline presented the project and asked the DRB to review the plans and return them to the Planning Office in one week for the preparation of the next DRB meeting to be held on March 27, 2001. Mr. Pohl asked Planner Caroline if the Board would have her comments by the next meeting, she replied"yes", they would. Mr. Raznoff noted the project was located next to the lot the city was considering purchasing for the City Library. He stated this factor would be significant in reviewing the plans. MOTION: Mr. Howe moved,Mr. Glenn seconded, to approve to open and continue the project to March 27, 2001. The motion passed unanimously, 6-0. ITEM 5. INFORMAL REVIEW Sun Spots of Montana Informal Review-#I-01013 -(Monroe) 421 North Broadway Avenue An Informal Review for advice and comment regarding the construction of a new builders guild complex consisting of+1800 s.f. of office space,±2545 s.f warehouse space,+670 s.f. sales space and small (+416 s.f.)diner. Mr. Bill Hicks joined the DRB. New Assistant Planner, Jeff Monroe, introduced himself to the DRB as the newest city staff member of the Planning Department. He presented the project and reviewed the staff report. Mr. Hicks explained to the DRB that the owner was using the current warehouse space for the storage of materials and for a point of delivery. He contented the owner wanted to improve the neighborhood,to be a catalyst for other people developing light projects in the area, and improving the north-east side of town. Mr. Hicks stated the owner's main concern was the viability of the project as a commercial project and rental spaces, as well as giving the community something back in the form of improvements. He stated their goal was to help the DRB push to beautify the north-east side of town, stating the people of the north-east neighborhood have given back good comments. He noted the neighborhood would be cleaned up and the community would gain something in return. Mr.Hicks stated the basis of the design was to incorporate some of the agricultural feeling of the area,which once existed. He suggested the materials and likeness of the existing buildings would be assumed. Mr. Hicks stated they have put together a program and realized there were a lot of issues which needed to be addressed and hoped for a good feed back from DRB. Planner Monroe reviewed comments of the DRC. He stated the sketch plan showed the appropriate number of parking spaces. He stated there was a need for sidewalks against the building. 3 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 Planner Monroe stated the alleyway still needed to be cut and snow removal determined, to keep things out of the alley. He stated the City Improvements had done a nice job showing where improvements might come along. Planner Monroe stated there needed to be a storm water retention area. Mr. Glenn suggested he was still lost and was unable to locate the site. Mr. Hicks explained where the site was located. He stated the corner lot where the project is located was unsafe. He noted the corner did not permit visual lines of site across to traffic coming from the other direction. Mr. Hicks stated a big concern was that it was not a 90 degree corner and they were concerned about lining up trees along the boulevard for a fence effect or telephone pole effect. He stated they were concerned about density of vegetation,which would be placed on the boulevard. Mr. Hicks stated they have tried to pull the trees back, away from the corner because of site triangle issues and concerns the City had. Mr. Glenn stated the area was ripe for development and noted the area had a very strong character. He would like to see more of this kind of development in the area. Mr. Glenn stated the advantage of being in an area that has character as opposed to a farm field, is that it gives the opportunity to develop architecture which is unique to this region of town. He noted two concerns;he was not convinced by the architecture shown, he suggested it he was like looking at a collage of ideas, and the second concern was that he would like to see a mixed use in the area. Mr. Hicks stated the project would be intended for people to be able to show their project,to display their product, and storage. Mr. Glenn stated he would like to see a mix of some level of fabrication on the site as well as for display. He stated in general, he would like to see more housing brought into the area. Mr. Glenn stated he would like to see a work/live situation. Mr. Hicks suggested he wanted to minimize parking as much as possible. He hoped the renters would use the space as a basis of operation and not have to drive to their place of employment. He hoped to reduce the parking requirements of the tenants. Mr. Hicks suggested a possible indoor bike parking area. He stated if he could reduce parking and add more landscaping it would benefit the area. Mr. Pohl stated the scale was trying to push too much to accommodate the needs of the site. He suggest bringing the scale down to accommodate the site. Mr. Hicks stated the owner asked him to push this thru with the scale, for comment. He wanted to invoke some comments and find out the response from the Board. Mr. Pohl stated the mention of the diner was not on the plan. Mr. Hicks stated the plans for the diner were not concrete. He showed where the diner was proposed to go, if in fact the diner was included. He suggested the site of the diner was convenient for the public and easy to see from the road. Mr. Hicks stated the owner was still considering a tenant for the diner. He stated the diner would be carry-out for breakfast and lunch, primarily for the tenants of the area. Mr. Pohl stated the parking would not be adequate for such a diner. 4 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 Planner Sherman explained the amount of seating needed for such a diner. Mr. Pohl stated there were two different site plans which did not designate parking. He suggested a better parking arrangement. He stated the access is close to a dangerous corner. Mr. Hicks stated the access currently existing. Mr. Hicks noted the DRC stated it would be possible to close the access and utilize the left over space. He stated the spot is narrow and that is why they are looking at a reduced scale. Mr. Glenn suggested using the back area to fit the parking into the plan. Mr. Pohl asked what the adjacent unit was. Mr. Hicks stated it is M-1 with residential. Mr. Pohl Eked the approach, but was concerned about putting too much on one site. Mr. Hicks stated with the odd corner, they are concerned with on street parking in that area. He stated they want to foster a good relationship with the owner and the neighbor and do not want their customers parking in front of the houses. Mr. Hanson stated the building character, and the agricultural theme, could be a positive theme in this area. He noted some of the elements of the building seemed out of proportion and that the perspective must have been done earlier. He suggested also that the entry seemed out of proportion. Mr. Hanson liked the perspective sketch better. He suggested bringing the upstairs corridor down and up to scale. Mr. Hanson suggested that sun rooms, glass, and glazing were the concept of Sun Spots. He stated he felt the agricultural forms were in conflict with the form of the building. He stated the overall solution needed to be stronger. He suggested the height of the glass on the roof seemed off. Mr. Hanson stated the circulation needed to be re-organized. He asked how firm the development of the footprint was. He stated from a functional stand point, if the building changed and shifted towards the alley, a landscape buffer and the entryway could be better,but would give up access on two sides. Mr. Hicks stated he wanted to keep it modular. He suggested a small roll up door on the front of the building. He stated on a concept level, if you haven't sold the space he might have some room to move. Mr. Hicks stated the owner needed to utilize the space until the new building could be built so he could move his materials to the new space. He stated the warehouse space is an absolute need for the owner. Mr. Hanson stated there is a possibility for temporary storage. He stated with a bit of manipulation you could create more landscaping for the parking area. Ms. Smith liked the overall concept of the plan. She noted her main concerns were in the 15-18 parking spaces. She stated the curb cut should be eliminated to eliminate the problems and worries, suggesting it would then open up possibilities for the site. Ms. Smith stated that between the curb cut and the landscaping, she would like to see the curb cut and more landscaping put in. Mrs. Smith suggested incorporating glass so the wall was not so dominating. 5 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 Mr. Howe commended the designer and owner for the manner in which the project was presented. He stated that he liked the plan as presented. He stated the north side had nice, older residences and had mixes of commercial and industrial use. Mr. Howe felt both of the ideas came together, being neither totally residential nor industrial. He stated more people would accommodate more people earning money. Mr. Glenn showed a sketch of the front yard with a 20`setback,to relate with existing homes. He stated that if you spin the front to Main Street that would help with the parking situation and use the alley as an industrial access. Mr. Hicks stated if the building was to close to the corner, it posed a concern toward the building. He hoped to promote more vision around the comer. Mr. Glenn stated the most important thing in agricultural buildings was clarity of form. Mr. Pohl stated the strong agricultural form is the greenhouse. Mr. Raznoff stated the dryvit should be scaled down and the corrugated material used more. Planner Monroe stated the three foot setback was allowed in M-1,noting residents directly to the south are in the M-1 zone. Mr. Raznoff stated the setbacks needed to be enlarged or taken away completely. Mr. Raznoff expressed thanks to the Board and the applicant for good comments. The DRB talked about different ways to make the meetings go smoother in reference to the applicant's submittal material. Suggestions were: models, limited speaking time. Planner Sherman gave an update on Cowdrey Towers. He stated there had been a couple of meetings with Mr. Springer and they have stated to him that the project is not ready because of concerns by Historic Preservation Office Derek Strahn, the DRB,the use of the site,parking, and relationship of the site to Grand Avenue. Planner Sherman stated there needed to be a re- submittal and more reviews by the Boards. He stated the changes that had been made to date by Mr. Springer. He stated there had been talk about a major hotel coming in across the street and the surrounding uses. He stated the project was getting better but still not satisfactory. MOTION: Mr. Glenn moved, Mr. Pohl seconded, to resend the motion to accept minutes of January 1, 2001. MOTION: Mr. Howe moved,Mr. Glenn seconded to amend the previous motion to accept the minutes and resubmit the minutes to the Planning Director. 6 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mr. Hanson moved,Mr. Howe seconded to adjourn. The motion carried unanimously 6-0. The meeting wa adjourned at 8:15. im Raznoff, Vice C. irp r n Design Review Boar This meeting is open to all members of the public. If you have a disability that requires assistance, please contact ADA Coordinator,Ron Brey,at 582-2305(voice)or 582-2301 (TDD). 7 Design Review Board—Minutes of March 13,2001 ATTENDANCE ROSTER MARCH 13, 2001 Those persons attending the Bozeman Design Review Board meeting are requested to sign the attendance roster. PLEASE PRINT neatly and legibly. NAME ADDRESS 1. C-\fv �-�CSkc--Q, A,-,'- 2. )-' C S C D l) �J lnl �-� A,J•� 3. Y,,i ( , � l J�ZCi'L 4. 5. (A&A— 7. C t 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.