Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-26-1997 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY,AUGUST 26, 1997 MINUTES ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Kim Walker called the meeting to order at 3:31 p.m. She directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present Ed McCrone Roger Cruwys Jody Olsen Richard Knell Rich Noonan Mara Gai Katz Dave Skelton Mike Gafflce Henry Sorenson Dean Patterson Bob Gilbert Kim Walker Carol Schott Jeff Krogstad Walt Willett Joan Rudberg Paul Gleye Mark Iwaniak Tom Henesh Ron Lurie Jerry Taylor Lowell Springer ITEM 2. MINUTES OF AUGUST 12, 1997,MEETING (Not available at this time) ITEM 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. Swan Falls CUP/COA#Z-97126 - (Skelton) 1915 West College Street - A Conditional Use Permit Application to allow a phased 2-building, woodframe, 2-story office complex. Chairperson Walker asked if anyone had requested removal of this item from the consent agenda. MOTION; Hearing none,Mr. McCrone moved,Mr. Gleye seconded,to approve the consent agenda as per staff recommendations. The motion carried 6-0. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEWS A. Taco John's MiSP/COA/Dev/Var#Z-97116- (Olsen) 303 North 7th Avenue A Minor Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness, a Deviation, and Variances to allow the replacement of the existing Taco John's building with a new,larger building and increase the parking in the back of the lot. Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 1 A. Taco John's MiSP/COA/Dev/Var#Z-97116- (Olsen) 303 North 7th Avenue A Minor Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness, a Deviation, and Variances to allow the replacement of the existing Taco John's building with a new, larger building and increase the parking in the back of the lot. Chairperson Walker introduced the project. Mr. Knell joined the DRB. Planner Jody Olsen reviewed the application noting the one deviation was being requested from the sign code and the three variances are being requested from the Bozeman Zoning Ordinance. She noted that design review shows that mechanical equipment and its screening are to be shown on the final site plan. Staff is recommending the sidewalk be extended from front door walk to the parking lot, and a landscape island be installed around the proposed garbage enclosure. Mr. Knell noted that the old sidewalk will be removed. He noted that the mechanical equipment is screened by the parapet. Mr.Willett asked about the cooling equipment jutting from the building. Mr. Knell noted that it is now incorporated into the building. Mr. Sorenson asked about the traffic pattern. Planner Olsen noted a 26'drive aisle is required by Code. Chairperson Walker asked if the dumpster has to be located where it is shown and if the tree has to be removed. Mr. Knell noted the tree is in the middle of the retaining wall. Planner Olsen noted she is recommending a landscaping island. Mr. McCrone asked about the sign. Mr. Knell explained the reasons for the size. Planner Olsen explained the calculation of the signage and primary frontage of the building on North 7th Avenue. Discussion followed on them. Mr. Sorenson asked who decides on granting the variances. Planner Olsen noted they are decided by City Commission. Mr. Gleye noted that the Staff Report is confusing. Senior Planner Dave Skelton, acting on behalf of Andrew Epple, explained the variances,noting that State Statute doesn't allow DRB to address variances. Mr. Gleye noted he has a problem with allowing the deviation without a superior contribution. He asked that Staff, in the future, comment on any superior contribution or excellence of design which would justify the granting of the deviation. Mr. McCrone asked about the criteria for variances. He noted that hardship and spirit of the ordinance are two of them. Mr. Skelton noted there are three criteria. Mr. Gleye moved to approved with conditions 1, 2, and 3. The motion was seconded by Mr. Willett and carried 6-0. Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 2 B. American Bank Drive-Through MiSP/COA#Z-97131 - (Patterson) 32 North Willson Avenue - A Minor Site Plan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow a new facility with drive-through and walk-up facilities. Bob Gilbert joined the DRB. Planner Dean Patterson noted that Staff generally supported the project. The memo from Historic Preservation Officer Derek Strahn indicates the appropriateness of the design. He reviewed the application and DRC concerns. He noted that classical forms have been used in the downtown area. The Historic Preservation Officer felt the landscaping along the street should be more mature than the current zoning standard to better ensure its survival on this site,particularly in proximity to the intersection. Mr. Sorenson asked about moving the canopy. Planner Patterson explained the possible change. Mr. Gleye asked about DRC concerns about backing out to into the street. Planner Patterson noted it is the queuing of traffic on Willson that was DRC's concern. Mr. Sorenson asked about the setbacks. Mr. Gilbert noted there is a 10 foot requirement for fire issues. Mr. Gleye asked Mr. Gilbert how many cars might be waiting t the drive-up. Mr. Gilbert explained the queuing at Norwest, a single bank. American Bank is a second location. Also,he has been at the bank during noon,the busiest time, and the most cars he's had ahead of him is one. Mr. Sorenson asked if the DRB will see the project again if it changes. Consensus was that DRB would not see it again. Mr. Gilbert noted he had the same concern as DRB has if the proposed skylight is not installed. Discussion on the skylight concluded that massing and design of the structure will not change, so the skylight installation isn't an issue. Mr. Gleye asked if the third lane could be changed from an ATM to another teller lane. Bob noted it could, and the bank has investigated installation of a machine to do better money distribution. Mr. Gleye noted it is a commendable design, notably that the parking is not in front of the building. MOTION: Chairperson Walker moved,Mr. McCrone seconded, to recommend approval to the City Commission with Staff condition 1 and the addition of a second condition, that should the applicant decide to eliminate the skylight it is a minor modification and would be permitted. The motion carried 6-0. C. Stoneridge Subdivision Developmental Guidelines- (Skelton) Conceptual review of the developmental guidelines for the Stoneridge Subdivision PUD. Lowell Springer and Tom Henesh joined DRB. Senior Planner Dave Skelton noted this is the first PUD incorporating the North 19th Entryway Guidelines. He noted the developmental guidelines are well done with few omissions. This application is setting the model for future and all other development in the North 19th entryway. Mr. Springer reviewed comments from the last meeting. He noted changes made in the Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 3 subdivision-streets,buffering, and staggering of buildings. He noted the guidelines in hand and the site plan on the wall are the master plan. He noted they have gone beyond what the zoning ordinance requires. They have created an additional landscaping easement of 11'to 14' for buffering. He noted it is an opportunity for a quality entrance to Bozeman. They have created two open space areas to be commonly maintained. The open space areas have separate conditions with the trails and creek included. The development will have an architectural review board and Springer Group will be a permanent member. Mr. McCrone asked about the types of buildings to be encouraged in this subdivision. Mr. Springer explained, noting the Stoneridge Development Committee(SRDC)will have to approve before a project will come before the City review processes. Chairperson Walker noted there are some sections that are contradictory with other sections or the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC), such as,the roof pitch minimum of 4:12. Planner Skelton noted the entryway Design Objectives Plan encourages roofs of more than 6:12 pitch. Chairperson Walker noted that the criteria in the Guidelines seem to mesh with the BMC in some sections,be greater in some sections, and lesser in some sections. Lowell noted that whenever the SRDC is less than the City statutes,then the City statutes prevail. Planner Skelton concurred with Chairperson Walker, and noted there are changes that need to be made. Chairperson Walker suggested meeting with Mr. Springer to go over the guidelines after she has gone over the document again to mark the specific items. Mr. Gleye asked that Planner Skelton take time to review,make recommendations to the applicant,then make a recommendation to the DRB.Mr. Springer noted it is a conceptual document and he needs conceptual comments. He will take specifics,but isn't anticipating a lot of them until the document is refined and reviewed further by his office. Mr. Noonan noted that he sees this as a packet of six projects, one of which is 60 pages. He would like more time to study the document. Though it is like a zoning document,there's no table of contents or index. Mr. Springer noted the document isn't complete,therefore, the table of contents hasn't been developed. Mr.Noonan asked that the name of the development be the same throughout. He noted that what has been done has been done well,he just needs more time to go over it. Mr. Springer suggested scheduling a discussion at the end of another meeting to go over it in detail. Mr. Sorenson noted confusion with the documents received from the Planning Office. Apparently the applicant is building a boulevard with smaller structures towards town and with more massing towards the interstate. Mr. Springer concurred. Mr. Sorenson noted a pedestrian trail/linear park is planned along creek. Chairperson Walker noted it isn't clear how the details of footprint, scale of buildings, landscaping will be incorporated. Mr. Springer noted that is shown on the site plan. Mr. Sorenson suggested the construction of larger scale buildings along north 19th and smaller scale buildings closer to the pedestrian trail. Mr. Sorenson noted the applicant's desire for non period buildings in this development He asked if that eliminates landmark buildings. He discussed buildings, open space, the creek, and the trail. Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 4 Chairperson Walker noted a concern with the bicycle paths. Mr. Springer noted they are visiting with the Parks Department tomorrow, further noting that bikes and pedestrians are not compatible on the same trail. He wants to eliminate the bikes from pedestrian walkways and trails. Lowell noted the bike trail will be along the public right-of-ways. Mr. Henesh emphasized that there is a limit to the width of the trail and the amount of green space that can be utilized. Mr.Noonan suggested leaving the trail gravel because if it is paved,it becomes a raceway. Mr. Gleye commented that he is having difficulty reviewing the document due to 1)regulatory measures, 2) landscape plan and 3)the guideline for monitoring of the subdivision all being rolled together. He suggested separating the three from one another,putting the quality items in the guidelines. The document could be much more concise. Chairperson Walker suggested separating the City ordinance items from the Homeowners' Association items. W. McCrone asked Planner Skelton about the City's PUD process and if the PUD can precede the Ordinance. Planner Skelton noted the PUD allows for a relaxation of the Regulatory Standards,however,the applicant must make it very specific which standards he wishes to relax. Discussion followed on the document. Mr. Sorenson asked about the use of the airplane shaped building. Mr. Springer noted it is a retirement facility. Mr. McCrone asked about the designation of the lots as to particular uses. He is concerned that the uses are so restricted that a replacement business couldn't be found to take the place of a business that moved to another location. MOTION: Mr. Gleye moved, Chairperson Walker seconded,to continue the discussion until Staff can review and give its recommendation. The motion carried 6-0. Mr. Springer encouraged DRB members to write on their copy of the document and make comments. ITEM 5. INFORMAL REVIEW A. Chuckwagon Chili Informal 41-9748 - (Skelton) 720 South 10th Avenue - An Informal Application for advice on the conversion of an existing structure into a restaurant. As the hour was getting late,Mr.Noonan left. Jerry Taylor and Ron Lurie joined DRB. Senior Planner Dave Skelton reviewed the project. Mr. Taylor reviewed the proposed business, seating,parking,retaining wall between them and Me and Jans, and location of the building. He noted it is to be a prototype for other future facilities. He continued that they plan to use the alley for exiting, and the structure will be smaller than the existing building. Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 5 Chairperson Walker asked if the landscaping will meet the points. Mr. Taylor noted it will. He noted the building is a conceptual rendition of a chuckwagon and noted the wheel windows. Mr. Willett asked about the height of the new building compared to the existing building and the slope of the sidewalk to the building. Jerry noted they plan to landscape the site well to make it a asset to the neighborhood. Mr. Sorenson asked about the entryway. Mr. Taylor explained the pull-out area along the driving aisle as being a buffer, which will encroach into the 26 foot wide required driveway. He is suggesting an alley exit. Mr. Sorenson noted that in the winter with snow accumulation,people may run over the pull-out area. Chairperson Walker asked if the driveway is encroaching into the 8 foot side yard setback. Mr. Taylor noted it is not. Mr. Gleye asked if this property is on the fringe between the B-1 and residential zoning districts. Planner Skelton noted it is. Mr. Gleye asked about a new zoning district that has been discussed for campus businesses. Planner Skelton noted that Staff has in the past considered a new campus commercial zoning district but was not pursued due to other long range planning items. Discussion ensued on the type of customer that will use the business. Planner Skelton noted that a deviation is the mechanism for having less parking than is required by the BZO. Mr. Gleye noted that the patio seating would be great for walk up seating. Mr. Taylor noted that in order to have the patio seating,they would have to reduce the inside serving area due to the constraints for parking on the lot. Mr. Gleye noted it is an interesting design,however he isn't sure it is suitable for this area. The use would fit better in a commercial area. Mr. Taylor noted that when they see all four elevations,the design won't be so imposing as it is smaller than the house next door. He noted they will have to look at screening from the residential area. Mr. Sorenson noted that the use of colors could be detracting. Mr. Taylor and Mr. Lurie noted the colors will be subdued. B. Bozeman Inn Expansion Informal#1-9750 - (Skelton) 1235 North 7th Avenue - An Informal Application for advice on the enclosing of the patio and relocating the existing outdoor swimming pool. Mike Gaffke and Mark Iwaniak joined the DRB. Senior Planner Skelton presented the application, noting the deviation requested for parking to encroach 15 feet into the 25 foot front yard front yard setback and a variance requested to retain the existing sign. They will also need a deviation for fewer than the required number of parking spaces. He noted the applicant wants comments on the 10' wide strip along north 7th. He concluded by noting the application will come back to the City as a CUP application. Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 6 Mr. Gaffke noted they want to improve the entryway corridor. Mr. Willett asked if the two accesses will remain. Mr. Gaffke explained the closures and openings of the accesses. Discussion ensued on how the parking lot traffic circulation works, snow storage, and the effect of car lights shining across traffic on North 7th. Mr. Skelton drew a suggestion on the board, a 30 inch high retaining wall with foliage above it,noting the applicant would like to plant only a hedge. Mr. Gleye noted that hedges aren't the best for screening headlight beams. Mr. Iwaniak spread out the plans for the covering of the patio and the construction of the pool area. Mr. Gleye asked if anything was being done to the North 7th facade. Mr. Iwaniak noted no changes were planned for the front facade,however, the parking lot will be restriped. The berming and/or retaining wall for the 400+-feet along North 7th Avenue is to be landscaped. Mr. Gleye asked why they are asking for a variance for the sign rather than reducing the size of it. Mr. Gaffke noted the only change in signage they are proposing is to install a directional sign to get people into the parking lot from the south. Mr. Iwaniak suggested installing ornamental trees and shrubs fairly close together to provide the screening. Mr. Gaffke noted they would like to install a retaining wall for part of the frontage,but to cover the entire frontage would be costly. Chairperson Walker noted if this were a formal submittal, she'd recommend a solid retaining wall. Mr. Gleye asked how many parking spaces are required. Mr. Iwaniak noted 122 are required, however, they are adding 20+- spaces to what they have and will still be 20+spaces short. Mr. Sorenson noted the DRB is looking to make the North 7th Avenue entryway as beautiful as possible. He doesn't feel the sign fits with what they are trying to do. He asked if they have parking problems in the winter also. He noted that people don't park well in the winter when they can't see the striping. Discussion followed on the parking problems. Mr. Gaffke noted no more seating is being created by enclosing the patio. Chairperson Walker recognized the effort in trying to improve the site. Mr. Gleye noted a concern with the signage. He didn't think he could support the application as it has been submitted for informal review and asked how the narrow boulevard was allowed to happen. Planner Skelton noted that extra right-of-way has been taken to widen north 7th. Chairperson Walker noted that Mr. Cruwys may have some other ideas for landscaping. Mr. Iwaniak noted that he has talked to Shelly from Cashman about landscaping proposals. Mr. Willett suggested using two retaining walls and a berm. Mr. Iwaniak noted that would be very expensive, and suggested a staggered fence. ITEM 6. ADJOURNMENT Discussion ensued on Mr.Noonan's not being reappointed. Chairperson Walker is concerned that Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 7 his voting on applications will jeopardize their decisions. She suggested an agenda item at the end of next agenda to discuss the make up of the DRB. Planner Skelton suggested having the Planning Director make a determination. There being no further business,the meeting was adjourned at 6:10 p.m. Kim Walker, Chairperson, Design Review Board Design Review Board Minutes-August 26,1997 8