Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-11-1998 DRB Minutes DESIGN REVIEW BOARD TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1998 MINUTES 3:30 P.M. ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Vice-Chairperson Roger Cruwys called the meeting to order at 3:50 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Since there was no quorum, Vice-Chairperson Cruwys declared this to be an informal discussion of the following projects. Members Present Members Absent Staff Present Visitors Present Roger Cruwys Kim Walker Debbie Arkell James Goehrung Mara-Gai Katz Bill Hansen Dave Skelton Jack Schunke Henry Sorenson Walt Willett Carol Schott Michael Smith Ed McCrone Mike Potter Jan Roman ITEM 2. MINUTES OF JULY 28, 1998,MEETING (Not available at this time) ITEM 3. PROJECT REVIEW A. Parking Commission Parking Lot MiSP/COA/Dev#Z-98110 - (Skelton) 108-110 South Black Avenue - A Minor Site PIan Application with a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the removal and relocation of two existing residential units and the installation of a parking lot. James Goehrung and Mark Chandler joined the DRB. Senior Planner Dave Skelton presented the application,noting the conditions from Planning Staff and recommendations from the DRC and ADR Staff/Historic Preservation Officer. DRB members discussed the need to maintain the existing trees, color of the proposed fence, design of interior landscape island, and as a result, made the following Informal recommendations to the Parking Commission: 1. Shift the parking lot configuration in a southerly direction leaving a 5 foot setback and install an interior landscape island to preserve the existing elm tree. 2. Planner Skelton noted that the drive aisle width is 18 feet and noted the DRB supports this deviation. 3. Keep the location of the fence on the south property line. 4. Supports the deviation for the interior drive aisle width to save the elms. Mr. Goehrung noted he would take these recommendations back to the Parking Commission and they will make further adjustments. Design Review Board Minutes-August 11.1998 1 B. Baxter Creek Business Park PUD Concept/Pre-Ap #Z-98126 - (Arkell) Huffine Lane, West of Billion Auto Plaza A Planned Unit Development Concept Plan and a Pre-Application Application to subdivide 17.56 acres into 7 lots for commercial development. Jack Schunke, Mike Smith, and Mike Potter joined the DRB. Assistant Planning Director Debbie Arkell noted that the 15 day comment period will expire before the DRB meets again. She noted that even though there is not a quorum of the Board present, she will take the comments of the three members present and incorporate them into her report to the applicants. She reviewed the application. Vice-Chairperson Cruwys asked if they plan to add landscaping in the creek corridor. Mr. Potter noted they don't plan to change the types of plantings but may add more. He noted Wetlands West has found some old channels and they may go through the permitting process to try to move the creek to the original channel. He noted they plan to carry on the green corridor begun by Billion Auto Plaza. Mr. Sorenson asked what would be in the area marked"display area"on the large lot. Mr. Potter noted it is for future auto display if a car dealership is located there. He noted that if a car dealer locates there, that owner may want to deviate from the proposal slightly. Mr. Sorenson asked what happens to the setbacks where the structure meets the parking. Mr. Potter explained the gross areas defined by setbacks and parking areas. He noted the locations of sidewalks, accesses into the buildings, and landscape areas. Discussion followed on how the design will fit into the concept plan, the building envelopes vs. what will be constructed, and what the minimum setback between the structure and the sidewalks should be. Mr. Sorenson noted that the dilemma that DRB has is that once the DRB votes on the Preliminary PUD, the DRB has no further review of the lots and structures. Mr. Potter noted that they have created the Architectural Guidelines to be followed, and in another situation, these guidelines have worked very well. He explained the control features for a PUD. Ms. Katz noted the DRB concerns at this stage include the treatment of the natural amenities of the site. Mr. Potter noted the setbacks and buffering they are being required, and planning, to do. He noted the design of the street will be similar to that in Valley Commons and he displayed a cross section of it. He noted no parking will be allowed on the street. Vice-Chairperson Cruwys noted that these plans show how the whole project ties together. He noted this is what DRB wants to see. Mr. Schunke noted that the green corridor will continue north through Norton's property to the north and on to Bronken Park. Vice-Chairperson Cruwys asked if there was a trail system planned. Planner Arkell noted a trail was begun by Billion and she indicated where it will continue through this property. Design Review Board:Minutes-August 11,1998 2 Mr. Sorenson noted he likes the narrower streets. Mr. Potter noted that the street serves only these properties, and the plan is for the structures to be done in a theme like style and be aesthetically pleasant. Mr. Potter noted they have widened the approach driveways to create common approaches on the property lines which requires fewer curb cuts. Vice-Chairperson Cruwys noted he concurs with Mr. Sorenson on the street widths being narrower. He noted he wouldn't have any problem supporting the project at this point. He suggested using the open space for passive recreation or for native plantings rather than manicuring it. Mr. Potter agreed, noting that it is a priority to save the creek corridor. Mr. Potter noted more attention will be provided on the preliminary submittal with regard to the setbacks and other DRB concerns. Mr. Schunke noted he'd met with Mr. Bukvich, MDOT, to discuss the traffic flows between Durston and US 191 and other streets in the area. He discussed the State's and City's opinions on a north-south collector in this area. Mr. Potter noted that with the Valley Commons PUD, the PUD and Comprehensive Plan process does work when it's done right. Mr. Potter asked if they need to come back before the DRB. Planner Arkell noted they won't need to come back until the Preliminary Plan is submitted,because the review period for the concept plan will expire before the next DRB meeting. ITEM 4. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Roger Cruwys, Vice-Chairperson, Design Review oard Design Review Board Minutes-August 11,1998 3