Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-28-2001 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, AUGUST 28,2001 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Sorenson called the meeting to order at 3:36 p.m. and the secretary recorded the attendance. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Bill Hanson Dan Glenn Jami Morris,Assistant Planner Joanne Noel Dave Skelton, Senior Planner Dick Pohl Jennifer Willems, Recording Secretary Jim Raznoff Dawn Smith Henry Sorenson Nichole Wills ITEM 2. PROJECT REVIEW A. Old Bob Wards Expansion COA/ADR#Z-01157— (Morris) 2320 West Main Street �k A Certificate of Appropriateness Application to construct a 4,125 sf addition to the south side of the existing building, and related site improvements. Jesse Sobrepena, Lowell Springer, and Gene Cook joined the DRB. Planning Director Andrew Epple presented the project for absent Planner Jami Morris. He reviewed the conditions listed in the Staff Report, noting the applicant needed an Engineering Drainage Plan and a Certificate of Appropriateness. Planning Director Epple remarked on how thorough Planner Morris's staff report was, and noted she had listed conditions in accordance with the Entryway Corridor Guidelines. Planning Director Epple reviewed elevations and entrances shown on the plan, and conditions#6 &#7 in the Staff Report. He suggested windows and opaque canopies would be a good improvement. Planning Director Epple stated the project requires a Certificate of Appropriateness for architectural and landscape design Mr. Sobrepena explained that the metal roof was exposed. Mr. Springer stated the roof terminated into a mass which changed the feel of the roof. Planning Director Epple stated the applicant needed more interior landscaping. He stated a 3foot sidewalk which would connect from Main Street to the entrance of the building, needed to be implemented. Mr. Raznoff suggested the new fagade was more of an extension and reconfiguration of the exterior wall and not an expansion of the floor space. Chairperson Sorenson asked about the drive shown on the plan. Planning Director Epple explained that the drive was the same as on the drawing. He stated the drawing shows a landscaped area on the back of the building. Discussion on the landscaping of the west side of the building and easement issues continued. Mr. Hanson stated the access on the rear of the building was constrictive. He asked if there would be a truck access. Mr. Springer Lowell explained they would implement an overhead door if needed. Planning Director Epple stated the applicant needed to clarify the accessibility. Mr. Cook stated trucks normally back into the site. Mr. Sobrepena stated this meeting was the first time they had seen the staff report noting the architectural concerns. Mr. Sobrepena stated, initially Mr. Cook asked what could be done with the building. He stated by looking at existing photos, they are using the existing sub straight and will include more dimension and windows. Mr. Springer suggested there is a significant difference in the color being used over the entrances and the windows,noting it was subtle and identifies the location of the entrances easy. He suggested the strong shapes define the entrances. Mr. Springer stated the owner is not enticed by the north facing elevation of the existing building, and suggested by making the building look in conformance with surrounding buildings, would relax the elevation. Mr. Sobrepena stated the building will be 3 sided,but still will appear one dimensional. Lowell wstated by giving the buidlign. SEEE TApe Dick stated the back has a separate entrance and would see the parapet wall from that side. Jess stated they are locked into the height becarus of the exiswting roof. Dick asked if the wall still bowed.,jesse stated yes. Dick asked if there would be graphics on the signage. Gene stated each space will have their own recognition. Jim asked if there would be two tenants. Gene stated yes in front and one ro two in the back. Lowell stated tenants would want free standing signs up by main street and then something on the building itself. Joanne asked what the profile of the crown on the east side was and is it flat. Jesse stated it will jhave a dryvit transition into the roof. Jesse stated so it would not necessarily be a crown,b ut just dryvit. Chairperson Sorenson asked about the air conditioner. He stated the boiler platre requreimetns need to be screened. The lower band is antoher color of dryvit with no masonry. He asked if the entryways will have vestibule. Jesse stated there is none existing and none planned. Lowelle stated if tenants are wise and create one on the outside then one will be created on the inside as well. Mr.hanson stated the drawings are void of detail above the canopies. jesse stated it would be a good place for signage but they are not sure at this point. Jesse stated he had a hard time coming up with fill in for this space besides texture. Lowell stated possibly relief with dryvit to cause shapes and shadowing. mr.Hason suggested trim baneds to break up the detail above the canopies. Mr. hanson asked if the roof is one system. Lowell stated yes. Andy stated the greater emphasis si the entrances and window treatments. Henry explained the process of asking questions first and then making comments. Dick stated his comment form the main street view is that the massive amt.of space above the awning is awkward. he stated the vieew from the back looks like a facade without some sort of closure. jesse stated on the existing building you don't' pick up on it that much. Dick stated it looks fake. He is also concerned with the cornus piece,maybe a simple band instead of bringing something out. The view of the mechanical equip needs to b e addressed. he would like to see it more people friendly, he suggested designating compact wstalls. Jesse stated they have the option of regular stalls. he would like a physical pedestrian access to the main street. he would like to see a bycicle access also. Andy stated on a monutment sign they would like to see a broad, main message and then in smaller subtext, list the business. He stated the sign can become to busy and he stated they would work with gene. he stated he thinks it needs a monument sign. Dick stated a lot of grade changes need to occur to cure the drainage issue. he asked if the buikldling sets lower than main street. Lowell stated it did. He has concerns about scale of the frontage, signage and the view from the back of the building. He stated the residentgs will see the roof scape and feels there arfe items which need to be addre3ssed on the facade. Jim concurred with Dick,the facade has improved. He stated he liked the idea of wrapping the facade around the building and asked why the treatment does not occur on the west side. Jesse stated that could be incorporated. He stated if you treat the roof drainages thru a parapet wall it would address the concern about the appearance fo the 3 sided structure. He suggests another round of review. He stated the ideas for the canopies would be appropriate as stated in planner morris' staff report. he is concerned with the architectural massing. Dawn stated the plan is an improvement and supports staff recommendation and would like to see more of condition#6 implemented. She stated you could break up the mass with signage,but not with only one occupant. She asked if the applicant could make the awnings have more coverage and bring them up higher to break up space. she suggested using the awnings for signage. She supports the recommendation to look at other forms to break up the space above the awnings. She stated the area may not seem empty if there was more color or more richness to the color for visual relief. Joanne concurred it is a vasxt improvement over the old bob wards. She stated she disagreed with dick about the crown,noting the crown is one of the buildings strongest features and helps break up the void. She concurred with Dawn to increase or exaggerated the entrance ways and leave the windows to either side and just raise the entrance to break up the fagade. she stated a pedestarian walkway is needed and could be enhanced with landscaped elements. She liked the color scheme. The airconditioner on the roof needed to be screened. Mr.hanson stated most of his comments were stated already. he would like something to happen on the upper roof to make it more effective. he sugeested stepping the corner down. He suggested breaking the white plane up with corner trim or trim band, visually tying the whole thing together. The front, a different type of awning could be used to take away from the size of the fagade. the look of the bldg. is an improvement. and would like the entryway on more of a pedestrian sacle. he agreed with all of the conditions. Chairperson Sorenson stated the plan is a big change but not neseccarsily an improvmemtn. He staetd the design draws your eye to the entryway and creates a trasistion zone on the exiling fagade. He stated emphasis on the central area is needed. He suggested creating an emphasis over the entryway and is a desing challenge. He felt it was resolved straight forward on the existing building. He stated the plan shows sidewalk all away around the building and people will have to move to allow the doors to opoen. he suggested vestibules on the inside of the building. he felt the sidewalk is a safety issues. he liked the color and would like to see more articulation. he suggested around areas of greater use,use a more durable material. He would like the pedestrian pathyway to connect with main street as well. He concurred with staffs recommendations. Mr. Hanson asked about the doors, does there need to be a condition. henry stated the sidewalk needed to be large enough for the doors to opoen or vestibules Mr. Hanson moved to approves with staff condition a and require entry door to be recewssed to limit the impact of the doors on the existing sidewalks on all door entries for salty issues. Jim seconds. Dick asked if others had problems with the views from the south. Henry suggested another mass above the entryway to hide the mechanical equipement. Lowell staetd as soon as he saw the plan in 3-D he had similar concerns. He stgated they can isolate the lower element and step down and up and let the element make a statement of its own. He suggested it would take care of the huge mass. Andy stated there is no problem if the DRB wants to see the plan again. He suggested having the DRB see the project again with the revisions. He stated they could come back in two weeks. Henry asked if the applicant would like to table the project. Lowell stated they would like to go forward with the site planning issues and draw a bottom line if the applicant does not like the improvements he could walk away from the project. Andy stated that should be fine. Henry stated he would vote against the motion because he would like to see the project again. Bill stated the DRB has recognized the conditions but would like to see the fagade again. He stated it would be more affective to approve the project and adding the condition that the application comes back. Andy stated this project would not be seen by the City Commisison. Lowell asked for a comfort level for the applicant to go ahead as planned and for the architect to come back with the conditions being met. Bill amended the motion to add the addition of a condition requrieoing the project to come back for approval on the archtitecural review. Joanne seconded the motion. 6-0 amendment carried. To accept project with the amendement 6-0. B. Walmart Expansion MaSP/COA#Z-01112—(Skelton) Continued from August 14,2001 1500 North 7"'Avenue * A Major Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to construct a 84,000+/- sf expansion to the existing building and related site improvements. Further discussion and consideration on changes made by the applicant. Ms. Salvagi handed out information for the DRB to review. Ms. Salvagi, Ted Schwink, Brian Gallik, and Phill Craddock inner Skelton reviewed the staff report, noting the applicant is still requesting a 25%expansion on the sign. He reviewed the conditions on the original staff report. He stated the lighting is comparible to existing stores around town. The level of illumination for the lighting scheme for the new expansion has been addressed. PS stated there will be a formal public entrance off of the south side of the building. PS explained the original staff report and the recommendations from that staff report. he explained how the applicant responded to the recommendations and conditions on the original staff report. He stated the applicant had posted the original elevations and the new proposed elevations with the changes as stated in the original staff report. 1 stated in the review it mentions the color block and asked if it was a concern. Planner Skelton explained the suggestion of nature materials on the building. The coment was more staff driven. inne asked if PS could review the parking to sf ratio. PS based upon the parking calculations and the zonging ordinance,the applicants original proposal was for over 1,000 parking spaces and based upon staffs and DRB recommendations the applicant responded by making the parking all 90 degress. Now the applicant is proposeing 946 parkings spaces which is 4.9 per 1000. The applicant might have to decress the parking in a later phase. trine stated in the new proposal there is still 4.4 per 1000. w,. -. PS what the sign increase proposed. P/S stated the applicant could have 500 sf or a 25%increase and noted the applicant is asking for a deviation. He stated all commercial lots are allowed 400 sf and may have a 25%deviation if in the entryway corridor. Dawn asked about sign height, is there any deviation for sign height. PS stated the applicant would bring the sign height to code or ask for a deviation. Robin stated the sign is set back 47 feet from the right of way and is 32 feet tall as per the ordinance. 1 stated he had not questions for the moment. Pohl has no questions for staff. Chariperson Sorenson had no questions for staff ;. Salvagi apologized for steve not being in attendance. She introduced herself and gave a brief overview of the changes made from the comments made two weeks ago. Robin presented the most current site plan and explained the changes. She explained the progression presented to the DRB. Robin reviewed the changes made from the staff report and comments made at the last DRBmeeting. e staetd they added a pedestrian plaza and made them connect to the existing pedestrian walks extending them to the North 7th walk thru a pedestrian plaza. She stated the pedestrian connection to the access point at the North 7`h entrance picks up andy pedestrians coming from the western side, having a direct connection. She stated the have implemented a sidewalk to the outside plaza on the North 7th side of the parking lot. i the south elevation they have added a collection node where pedestrians can collect off of North Oak,which is focused on the shuttle drop and the full service entrance into the store. They will implement a crosssection along Oak. She stated they have enhanced the plaza center to south having a 27' pedestrian plaza center,with trees, tree grates, and planters. There are planters which screen the shop entrance. The strip can be used as a waiting area for the shop. She stated they tried to address the pedestrian concerns as noted in the last meeting. e stated the stalls are now 20' stalls and the landscaped overhang areas still have 18' stalls,which elimated a row of parking but expanded the landscaped area. The have implemented more parking islands, dorpoing the parking ratio to a 4.4. She stated PS suggested landscape changes. a formal landscaped tree on the Oak Street side and is mirrored on North 7ch with an informal feel on the inside of the formal street trees. There are ornamental and shade trees to bring streetscape theme down the linear corridors and on to the site. She explained the connection with the street scape into the Oak street entrance. She stated there was no time to prepare a landscape drawing,but she noted a note that a final landscape C D would be provided for final staff review. She explained the additional landscape details. She stated they would vary the plant species and noted there is pedestrian amendities such as benches, cart corrals have been implemented. Sugnificant evergreen to the east side was implemented. She stated they have added an entire row to compliment the existing evergreens. They are masked along the east side to buffer the elevation. She stated the existing wetland is full of trees and shrubs noting they have implemented more trees and shrubs along the wetland. She explained the areas that landscape had been implemented. She stated the new sign would be located in the corner by North 7ch and the highway. e stated they have included a full lighting plan. She explained the light positions, wattage recommendation and other specifications used in the lighting plan. e stated the pylon detail meets code in all respects. SL�twenk stated this is the 4"'time they have met with the board and concurred all of the proposals had been painted block. He stated staffs recommendations were implemented in the interval color. He stated a portion of the north wall will remain, and will remain painted. He stated at the last meeting they had not indicated the lamintated wood entry at Oak street. Noting there is much more sidewalk and plaza area on this side. He stated they will use quick brick to allow the applicant to build exterior walls as if they were concrete block to allow for insulation. Noting it looks like clay masonry block. The pilasters break up the fagade. He noted the color band which runs along the building was enhanced by decreasing the effis over the entrways by raising the entry canopies and broken the fagade into two planes. The details have changed at the pylasters at the etnryw with a piled wayenscott and introduced another colored band around the building to match the metal roof color. He showed examples of the band color and the metal roof. He stated there are three exit doors on the rear fagade, and created elements on each door. he stated the I-90 side will have a single color and will read different than the other 3 sides. Noting these were the major changes to the elevations from the painted to the intercolorval units. They implemented laminated beams around the perimeter. He suggested the interval color changes the detail. He presented a blend of the block which is the field of the building. Young one showed the color of the dark strip and showed where the strip would be implemented on the buikdling. Mr. Swenk stated they are in the air, noting the block band around the bldg could remain painted. He stated they have tried to respond to the comments . F --son asked the impact of the interval color block instead of painting. he was surprised to see the 4x 16 block. Mr. S stated the existing block is 8x 16. ;. Noel asked what the dark spots, squares in the parking lot are. Robin stated they are areas where the pavement is flush all the way across and will be color concrete per ADA. Smith and Mr. Raznoff had no questions. % Pohl asked if the new layout would have a similar drainage pattern as the way it is existing. He suggested the parking lot has standing water now. Robin stated she would assume the drainage will change to one direction and be detained in one pond. Hanson stated he applaude the efforts to address the concerns and feels the project is a positive addition to the community. He stated he does not support forcing the applicant into a secondary material on the building. he stated by dictating a new material it is not a fari playing field to new projects in the area, stateing it is difficult to intergrate the existing bldg with the new bldg. He stated with the detail at the entryway, and in the drwyvit and pylasters the project can be successful,without changing the material. He stated that ultimately the new material has more richness,but struggles with the boards decision on changing the material. he sstated the DRB has struggled with the seas of parking but is excessive. He stated the applicant started at 6 and now are down to 4. he commendted the redesign of the poarkind lot but would like to see less stall. He stated he would like to see 2 points integrated on the site plan. he suggested there is no connection from the Oak street entrance and the back of the building, to include the shop. He started he liked the increased frontage on the west for pedestrian kuse. he is in support of the project. He stated the project will ompliment the community. ai.r..rson Sorenson asked about the white elementws in the garden center. Mr. S stated the gabled ends are a clear poly carbonate, the roof elements are clear for natural light in the garden center. He asked about the natural light getting into the interior of the building. Mr. S stated in this particular project there will be skylights over the entries. He stated when you expand existing stores you continue the lay in ceiling. He stated there would be no ceiling and exposed structures at two of the entries. He explained the skylights in the exposed structures. He stated the grocery area will be placed in the existing bldg. He stated WalMart has looked at adding skylights in existing buildings,but the problem is with roof leaks. He stated they will raise the existing lay in ceiling. He showed where fiber glass, clear panels would be located. inne stated she appreciated the changes t=which have been made but still has concerns. She stated the shear mass is hard to shield, and in reality landscaping is great in the summer but in the winter it is not. She asked if WalMart has staffed people to landscape. Ms. Salvagi stated they do have a landscape person. She stated they did walk thru walmarts landscape and found only 3 defunct trees. She stated one of the trees had a disease and they have tried to treat the trees. She stated they have replaced the trees. Joanne stated the landscape at the landscape is always looking bad. Ms. Salvagi stated Walmart has tried to save water. Joanne stated she wonders how anything can grow in the sea of asphalt. She stated the code exists for a reason and environment is not sound. She suggested there will be snow removal problems. She is convinced that parking needs to be reduced to meet the parking code at a minimum. She stated the walkways to 7th ave. is a good start but feels they need to be widened. She feels there needed to have more landscape. She stated the oil change area has an island and does not look as welcoming as the pedestreian plaza to the west. She stated the pedestrian connection to the shop is not good. She stated the North facade is m;ore visible to the main entrance and suggested the arch. needs to be articulated more. She asked the applicant to consider something such as stone to surround the pylasters. She stated the bldg. suffers because of the materials. She concurred with Bill that the building should have the same material surround the whole bldg. and suggested incorporating wood or stone and change the color to an earth tone such as green. She would not support the project. Smith stated her views are not any different than two weeks ago. She applauded the applicant on the continuing changes. She stated she asked for picutes to get the feeling of a different entry suggesting the walmart in the picture works. She liked the landscaping improvements and suggested using native grasses to use less water. Ms. Smtih stated as far as the north wall and asking for a new material, she felt it is alright to ask for a different material. She felt this is the time to implement what the community wants. She does not think the bldg should be painted for maintenance purposes. She concurred with Joanne that the materials should be wood or stone. She would not support the parking incrase in the magnitude proposed. Ms. Smith stated Walmart already has the parking needed and does not see the need to increase in parking until needed. >. Salvagi presented the ULI study and what the ULI recommends and does parking studies on what parking ratio is needed. Ms. Smith suggested the parking lot is not full and stated the city and state is not growing as fast as Wallmart has expected. She stated she would not support an increase in signage although walmart is on the I-90 it is also on the Norht 7`' corridor which she staetd it is polluted with signs. She stated she would not support the project as presented. 1 stated he reconginzed the improvements thus far and is impressed with the accommodations for pedestrian collection. He stated the differences in the picture of the evergreen store and the plan presented are veryk different. �k ;d the applicant has complied with the issues from the last meeting. he liked the landscaped treatment. he basically suppo0rts the project. he stated he does not support the parking lot and would phase the parking lot in at a future time. He stated he liked the fagade of the bilding and the scale of the entraces. he has condcerns about the north wall noting almost 1/3 of the wal in new construction. and if that is the case why not change the materials. He stated the applicant has heard what has been said at every meeting and has blended the infomaiton very well. n1y asked if the lavender color represented disituoius trees. ms.robin stated it represent disiduous flowing trees. he stated he is impressed with the thought and care put in to the buloidng. He liked the changes made in the pedestrian ways to 7th and oak. He concurred with bill there is a need for one more collective element to pull the shop area together. He understood the parking orinentaiton and suggewsted it has been reduced. he would change the color of the doors to a dark earth tone. He like the artickulation of the steip upo and the canopy and the banding. He felt it is restrained but effective. he sated he felt the glazed area needed to be broken up. Mr. S explained the materials of the glazed areas. He stated it is translucent material,not as thick as a cow wall. He stated the questions he asked about last time have been addressed. He stated the painted side would not be able to be matched right on, he suggested havaing a change of value in the mateials. He stated he has less concern about the wall because of the distance. He stated the public side walls have more significance than the far wall. Mr. S stated the presented project is at a pedestrian scale and the picture of evergreen is not. Ms. Salvagi stated the beam features and the metal deatial is very similar, Henry likes what is done with the entryways. He stated taking the concepts of a large box store the applicant has addressed the parking well. Pohl moved to accept the project as presented with conditions outlined in the staff report. Jim 2nd Discussion: Mr.Hanson stated he supports the project and feels the scale and detail are done well. he stated the bigtgest issue is in the ratio of the parking, he staeted it is important to realize that the zone code is based on a minimum. He explained his thoughts about the minimum of parking. He stated with the addition of the food component and the store,there will be more parking spaces full. he staetd two frontages are addressed Oak street and North 7`h,he stated the new road(Oak street) is going to be used more frequently. He stated the 4.4 ratio needed to be identified and suggested possibly phasing but felt the parking is necessary to the sw area, the shop parking is necessary and the remaining aprking is what is exisitign. he stated condition#7, forcingt the applicant to change the material is not a good idea. He stated the elements brought into the desing are what breaks up the mass not the brick. He would alter condition#7 to allow Ms. Smith would disagree with Ms. hanson. she explained her thoughts on parking issue and feels it is a bad precedence to set by flip flopping the parking issues for different projects. Mr. Hanson stated he could use the same projects in the opposite direction. Mr.Hanson stated the parking is bsed on gross square footage. Discussion and debate on parking continued. Mr. Raznoff stated he thinks the site plan is a strength with pedestrian walkways, and as far as the number of parking spaces he stated that maybe there is more than what is needed. He stated he would support an amendment that specifies the proposal is above ULI recommendations of 4.0. He stated the parking is above the range of 4.0 and felt an amendment could be introduced. he stands byu the motion on the floor. Mr. Pohl stated he is flexisble with the parking and can see times when the parking would be frill. He would be supportive to eliminate parking to the 4.0 ratio and is concerned with where the parking would be taken from. He stated this lot with the landscaping would be on of the best landscaped lots in town. He stated he would accept a reduction in the parking. He stated regarding the material,real material is better than quick brick. He stated the west and south sides of the buidlign are in your face and would rather have the quick brick and not a painted bulding. he su;ggetsed covering the north with new material. Mr. Raznoff recognized the improvement made by walmart and would accept the quick brick material. Chairperson Sorenson stated on the staff report condition#1 has been satisfied,noting the dimension of the parking spaces have been addressed. #2 has been addressed, 43 also. #4 the landscape still needed to add the list of landscaped material. #5 has been addressed effectively #8 has been addressed #9 is still up for grabs. #6&#7 still need to be debated.He noted adding more gable was not a good ideas. he suggested the applicant has done more than what has been asked for. #7—is a phylisophicla issue. he stated he doesn't mind the north and the east side of the bilcding are not made of precious materials and do not need to be the same quality materials. The south and the west would improve the aspect of walmart and by adding the quality of the building would please the public. He refereed to downtown and the materials used to keep the public happy with the look of the downtown. He state4d parking is an issue. He staetd it is normally the case of the applicant wanting more parking. He stated if there was a consideration for reduction in parking a good place to reduce parking would be in the area where the double row of trees are located. He stated he would suggest deleting dcondition#6, in that walmart has delt with the issue and that condition#7 remains as stated. Mr. Hanson stated the building addresses north 7"' and Oak street and felt some additional signage needed to be contemplated. Planner Skelton explained the allowable signage. Mr. S explained the signage and how they have directed the signage. Ms. Salvagi asked for consideration on the elevation that the signage has been greatly reduced. Dick doesn't oppose the deviation,nor does Chairperson Sorenson,noting they are on two major frontages. Henry stated#6,#7,and#9 need to be decided on and parking. He suggested starting with a seris of amendmens. Bill moved to amend and delet cond. 12358, dick seconded. Ms. Smith asked if the board saw walmarted light fixtures. Ms. Salvagio stated there was a light scheme proposed. Discussion on condition#8 continued. amend. passed Joanne opposed everyone else in favor. Amend in regards to condition#6—to delete condition#6 Bill moved, Dick 2nd Henry reviewed condition#6. He stated the secondary entrances has been well addressed. Favor, Dawn and Joanne opposed. Amend condition#7—Bill moved to delete condition#7 , no one seconded. Condition#7 stays as a condition. Amend (9) Dick moved to delete cond. #9 Jim seconded. Joanne and Dawn opposed Henry asked to have a member restate condition#9 Bill stated he moved to hjva the board support a deviation to she the signs as presented.—Dick seconded. Joanne and Dawn opposed. Henry asked to have a member make an amedn to add a pedestrian way and to move on the parking issue. Amend. Joanne recommend reducing parking qat the west and north entrances and retain parking in the south. Bill stated going from 4.4to 4.0, it would eliminate approx. 80 stalls. Bill stated the parking lot has 910 stalls and the issues have been discussed and discussed and where the board stands is if the parking is reduced to 2.8 there would be approx. 550. he stated the retail experts say the facility should have between 400-600. He stated having a 200,OOO.sf store with 500 parking stalls is not smart. He stated cutting 10% of the parking, 80 stalls, and if you look at potential growth, are we gaining a positive difference by taking the 80 stalls. Joanne stated andytime you reduce asphalt you have made a positive difference. Joanne stated she is suggested to take a whole section away. Bill stated there are significant landscape buffers on site. Joanne stated she doesn't see it as a significant buffer. Discussion on reducing parking stalls continued. Joanne amending to not to expand the exisinting parking lot, to redesign it so the parking spaces are reduced parking and re-orient the parking lot and replaning and widen the greenspace and pedestrian walkways and the North 7th area greenspace to be moved closer reducing the parking spaces to 2.8. Ms. Smith 2na Ms. Smith stated the parking lot would lstill be landscaped to the standards on the site plan. to hold the parking at 2.8 and redesign the parking lot so it meets the current level of development. FAVOR—Joanne and Ms. Smith rest opposed. Bill amends to simply add the JIM seconds, all in favor. Oriignal motion to accept project as presented with the additional amendments made to the proposal. RFAVOR- all except for Joanne and dawn. PS stated the will expand the .............. ITEM 3. ADJOURNMENT Motion to adjourn dick,bill 2n, 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). ATTENDANCE ROSTER AUGUST 28, 2001 Those persons attending the Bozeman Design Review Board meeting are requested to sign the attendance roster. PLEASE PRINT neatly and legibly. NAME ADDRESS Rb,,1. ', A5scc , - 1 Pb 2- CeAQ[-,�� s SC 3. G, �e 4. lip-�fff lw� 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15, 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.