Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-26-2001 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY,JUNE 26,2001 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Vice Chairperson Jim Raznoff called the meeting to order at 3:34 p.m. and the secretary recorded the attendance. MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT STAFF PRESENT Bill Hanson Dan Glenn Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Jim Raznoff Henry Sorenson Jami Morris,Assistant Planner Melvin Howe Dick Pohl Jennifer Willems,Recording Secretary Dawn Smith Joanne Mannell Noel VISITORS PRESENT Paul Van Orden Hallie Rugheimer Van Bryan Dave Sovulewski Jerry Smania Ed McCrone Don McLaughlin Steve Kirchhoff Dave reviewed the s/r and the Informal minutes. DS stated under RS a PUD process to establish lot area from 1 /2 to 3/4 sfr, applicant desires private street with no curb gutter or sidewalks,with a public access easement Private, exclusive of the public trail, no interior traffic within project. S/R recommends additional pedestrian trail and street scape along headland drive. DRB needs to support street scape links the community. DS reviewed recommednations. DS stated he noted in the proposal there are no fences within the SFR. And reviewed the recommendations. DS stated the applicant has started culdesacs and suggested landscaping them more. 6' wide pedestrian pathway needs to be implemented with pavers. Van Bryan stated they tried to be respectful to adjoining properties in reference to lot size comparable to the surrounding neighbors. Van stated they are trying to stay away from drives which back out onto Bridger drive. He stated ideas they have come up with in reference to yards and how they face,no interior fences to create open spaces, allowance for underground pet fences. He stated the character was the biggest determining factor for the road. Van stated there is a softer road feeling with the project and as a compromise engineering stated water was a problem in the turn arounds. He explained how the water would be handled. He stated they planned the path from the galagator trail off of bridger drive. He stated they didn't want to create the multi layering of paths. He stated the end of the culdesac will be different materials. He stated the turn arounds are wider to allow emergency vehicles. He explained using the plans the landscaping in the culdesacs. He stated pedestrian circulation was how to provide something wihtout being redundant. He expressed his thoughts on the pedestrian layouts. He stated there will be berming and swales and the entry nodes will be heavily landscaped. He stated the layout has been made to help the impact on the future development for the neighbors on the other side of bridger drive. Mel stated he was wondering about the pathway and asked if the pathway had been looked at to locate the path on the other side of the property. Van stated they have tried to combine the pedestrian traffic. He stated the path affords people to get from one end to the other more easy. He stated neighbors were concerned about the trails in the back yards. Mel stated the only way to provide a way to consider a safer pedestrian pathway is ohn the side the applicant has provided. He asked if there was thought about sidewalk for younger children without having to cross traffic. Van replied the turn around areas are not an unsafe environment. Creasting a safe haven for children. Mel stated when there is an opportunity to have places where there can be byways in there subdivision and then not do it,he has to state the question. Bill asked about the detention ponds between bridger and headland drives and asked how the water is getting there. Van stated there will be culverts and gutters and there will be washouts where water can run underneath headlands drive. He stated they see hhandscaped curb cuts to allowfor water flow. He explained where the hardscapes will be located at the corners of the entrances. Bill asked about elaboration of landscaping along the entrywayes. Van reviewed the landscaping along the boulevards. Van stated there are large canopy trees along the trail and shurbs and landscaping along the entrances. DS stated he thought there needed to be more emphasis on trees and on the focal points of the entryways. Bill asked about other options for the walkway. He stated headlands is a local acess road. He stated the trail could meander. Van stated they hadn't toyed with the idea ofr moving across headlands drive. Bill suggested the trail is a thouroghfair for all pedestrian traffic. Van stated they saw it as a throughfair. Joanne asked where the curbs were located. Van stated there are no curbs. Joanne asked how wide the path was. Van stated it is 6' wide. She asked how wide Hitching Post road is. DS statedc the perameters for the county. Joanne asked what is the objection to adding another pedestrian path for more communicaiton to the pods. Van stated the thought was to create mediums in a relative small space, but does not want unused items creating more paving and hard surface. Joanne asked about the description of the pavement. Van showed her what the material would look like. She stated her feelings is the safety issue and noted people who are curious will use the road. She stated if you are encouraging families to live here you need accomodation for safe pedestrian. Van stated the meandering of the path offers more privacy to the tennants. He stated they will implement dips and landscaping. ms. Smith asked what is being counted as the open space. Van showed the areas on the plan, noting there is average footprint, side yard set back. DS suggested the dedicated park land is open spaces. Van pointed out where the park land is located. DS stated 65 % is reserved for open space. Van s tated if the max. foot print allowable for that lot and decduction of sideyard and rear yards setbacks. Dawn suggested if the exposure or view is better than the continutity will be divided. Jerry stated there will be an in house document, key, indication for the houses and strongly recommend the houses be placed as shown to keep the open land linkiing togheter. Dawn stated the owners will go and build where the view is the best. Dawn asked about the 2.6 acres where the primary park is located. She stated the access is secluding the park from the subdivision. She stated the people have to access the road two times to get to the park. She suggested the applicant consider a gravel trail on the back of the property to access the park. Jerry stated there were at first two parks and did a presentation to the neighbores and thery stATED they do not want a trail in their backyards. Van suggested the there were comments about 2 parks with the size. Jerry stated the sitewould be more comfortable. Dawn showed the lands which will not be used. She sxuggested the plan on openspace is deceiving. She stated building envellpes would ensure open corridors. She stated the path will not get a high use but suggested a bike rider. F Van stated the master plan for the trail system is to connect to the"M". Ms. Smith stated the two cuts would be a good place to hang a uturn and to pick up hitch hikers and suggests this is a spot which the applicant might not want. Jim asked about comment#2 item#4, the request to develp.Along the private space is it 50' spacing for street scape trees. DS stated there will be blvd. Trees on both sides. He stated it looks like 40-50 trees. The private street is along Headland street and not the interior. Are we asking for trees along bridger. DS stated no. He stated the subdivision will be on the upper scale side . He stated as a PUD there is the option to ..... Jim stated the staff has combined questions and comments and asked that the staff not be asked more comments. He asked bill for comments. Bill suggested bringing the trial to the private side of the road at the west end off of bridger drive awith a slight dive to headland and embrace it as a local walkway,he stated it would be used more by local people and continuting curbing the crossings off of the curbs woould help in the run off. He stated there are constrictions from walkway to bridger drive. He suggested the walkway would be better on the other side. It would become a pedestrian link to the park. If space is tight, if the walkway was gone, the right of way could be shifted to the north ;and feels in the long run it would be more effective. The blvd. Trees does not have the character, and would prefer grouping of trees at the courts, making it much more attractive. Jim agreed with Bill and sees the pedestrian walkway falling into headland more attractive. He suggested the link with future trails,he would stay on headland driver if it was avaliable. Move pedestrian way to other side. Jim stated the trees are a nice feature on the north side and not have 50' spaces relax it more. He likes the developmetn. He stated the keys promoted would be how there are exprewssed in the covenants. He stated the project is desirable and would recommend it to the commission. Motion: Mel moved to recommend to cC as presented along with the proposed conditions in the s/r and to add a condition that a pedestrian lane be introduced ont eh south side or move the proposed lane to the south side. Bill seconds discussion: Bill disagres with jim and the blvd trees and would like to see the landscaping effort put into nodes and pockets. Joanee suggested saying relaxing the requirement about trees. She suggested it is a transistional area. DS stated maybe establish a typical landscape plan at the intersections. Part 4 of condition 2 Applicants are comfortable working with dave with the landscaping to acomplish this. DS will verify#4. Vote on mels vote 4-1 Ms. Smith opposes. McLaughlin : Donald Mclaughlin joined the DRB. Jami stated the applicant is doing an addition to the back side of the buidlign. She reviewed the staff report. And the one condition. She presented a sample of the building material. She staetd ADR comments is that there be a match of the material. Mr. McLaughlin presented pictures of the consturciton of the buidling in 1872. He presented photos at in transistion periods of the building. He presented sketches of the basement, first, second,third and roof floors. He stated they are putting an elevator in. He stated there will be a wall of thermo fly wheel and the cornerstones with limestone. He stated the railing are still to be designed and the planters will remain. Ms. Smith asked if there are two staircases. Mr. M. stated there is only one staircase inside of the building. Ms. Noel asked if the apt. shares the floor with the studio. Mr. M. staetd he just kept calling it a studio. Mr.Hanson had no questions. He asked if there is assigned parking. Mr. M. stated the bank sold him 14.9 parking spaces when they sold him the buildign. Mr. howe stated it looks very nice Mr. Raznoff stated in ADA compliance there is the allowablility for wheelchair access and the second floor access will not work. Mr. M would adjust to allow for wheelchair access. Mr. M stated the building is sizmically sound and the rest will comply. MOTION: Bill moves to approve project and recommend approval to CC as submitted. Joanne seconds. Motion: passed uanimously. The Mill Informal: QM) JM stated the applicant is proposing a ...... and has asked the board to provide comments so the applicant may proceed. She stated there will be no improvements to the roadway. Ed McCrone joined the DRB. Proposal to add building"M". He presented a drawing of the surrounding areas. He stated there are a wide variety of uses surrounding the site. He reviewed the surrounding areas. He staetd he would like the buildign up as close to the hill as possible. He would like to incorporate a roll up door. He stated the building is very simple. He would like to match the existing color of the buildigns, a light grey possibly. He stated it is a pitched roof. Advice& Comments: Bill suggested if it private use there will not be much impact on the roadway. He stated about of the property would be leased out. Bill sugested fgureing out how people would come and go and suggested the metal building would not detract from the existing site and surroundings. Jim stated the simplest shed design is appropriate. And suggested a metal building. He stated simplicity is the better approach instead of weighting it down with details. Lowell Springer presented an informal of Cowdrey Towers. He stated comments last time was about parking and elevation treatment. He stated they will possibly pay cash in lieu or may be able to lease a row of parking from the Catholic Church. He stated they pick up landscaping with shrubs. They have reduced the parking on the site and have made the site more pedestrain oriented. Dawn asked about the snow storage and Mr. Springer stated they will have to haul all of the snow off of the site. He stated there will be a walk way implemented. Jim stated there is some change on the new site plan but nothing in the direction which Mr. Glenn had suggested. Lowell suggested there will be a lock out on the property during rush hour. Bill stated from a pedestrian standpoint it does open up and create a much more palable place. Jim stated the church has probably resigned the fact that people are not going to park there. Lowell stated the school has stopped leasing the parking area. Dawn suggested churches are a good place to pick up parking. Lowell stated comments made on the exterior elevation. Lowell stated the elements opn the sides of the clock tower will not be removed,the owner wants them. He explained the dimensions of the elements and the clock tower. He stated height limitation is 55' and Joanne does mind the height. Jim suggested bringing the roof down around the 5`" story. Mr. S stated the proporations would suffer a lot and were better when they were even higher. He suggested the roof is the only place to play with height. He stated they are shorter than two of the surrounding buildings. Jim as about the balvonires. Mr. S stated they have changed the balcvonies to the fake step out and they are supported within the rod iron. Mr. Smith asked about the annex on the back of the willson and asked if this roof would slope the same and if it is comparable. Mr. S. stated it would be a similar kind of roof. The roof is 16' 12'. Mr. S stated you would have to be out in the middle of the street to see the roof. Joanne aske if Mr. S. has considered a flat roof with the clock tower and having the cornus being the cap to the building. Mr. S stated the property owner likes the proporation and the shape. Jim asked about creating a model. Mr. S stated the 3 dimensional is a better representation of the building and is more effective. Mel agreed. Jim liked the video as well but would like to see the scale of the project comparecd to the baxter. Mr. S will present the video again. Ms. Smith would like to see the project in relation of the church steeple. Joanne stated it would block the church steeple. Bill asked Mr. S to present a scale from all directions. Mr. S staetd the elevation is misleading and suggested the church is higher in reality. Joanne staetd the spire is 85'front the ground. Mr. S stated the spire is greater on the church. Mel stated on one hand we have to entice more development downtown, and on the other hand we say there are to many things going on downtown. Are we going to let downtown be what a downtown is. He explained his feeling on how the DRB looks at the projects. Ms. Smith stated the massing of the building would be different if the building were in a different location. Mr. S explained how they are trying to perpetate the look of downtown with the cowdrey buildings. He compared Boston and asked the DRB not to kid themselves about what happens behind the building. Bill stated the fabric of the block is unique because of the church and is the gateway to main street. He suggested Mr. S. is stating this is where Main Street begins. He stated the building with the mass and the character is heavy, a dominate structiure and would become the bookmark on Main Street. Bill asked is they considered softening the site by pushing the site back. Mr. S stated they have looked at this aspect. Bill stated it is a residential structure. Mel suggested it is another Baxter. Bill stated a clock tower is a strong element and is on the same block as another strong element,the church and is not respectful of that element. Bill suggested the clock tower would be more dominant. Mr. S. stated the concept is to get to the point that there is a complex that makes the statement on main street. Mr. S stated the fabric is the complex of combinging the common vocabulary. Bill stated they did not compete with eachother. Mr. S stated he does not find the buildings competeing but complements eachother. Ms. Noel asked if when Mr. S is comparing the buildings downtown,the Bozsean, The Baxter, they all had flat roofes. Ms. Smith stated the building reminds her of a court house and Mr. S stated that is what they are trying to pick up,Ms. Smith stated it is not a court house but a residential facility. Ms. Smith suggested there is a conflicting element with the church. Mel stated obviously flat roofs were invented to be less expensive and to drain well, stateing they are equal. Mel asked if Mr. S has fought the owner about a flat roof. Mr. S. stated yes he has. Mr. S. stated the mechanical is in the roof. He stated the snow will not stick or slide and they have implemented a detail below for the sonw. Motion: Bill moves,jim seconds Meeting adjourned at 5:45. ATTENDANCE ROSTER NNE 26, 2001 Those persons attending the Bozeman Design Review Board meeting are requested to sign the attendance roster. PLEASE PRINT neatly and legibly. NAME ADDRESS r 1. VA � �2 �� f g /l H/ff5,V)e A1-,,11 2. 3. V , 4. � vG'I 5. 6. V -- r� 2— sU s S 7�✓y �, l i 7. on hlG aU 1�✓I L( h � i� 8. �l vL o �p S �g ' 7�v e 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16, 17. 18. 19. 20.