Architectural Review Committee

WHITEFISH ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES May 19, 2020 The meeting was called to order by Kathy Skemp at 8:18 AM PRESENT: Stacy Caldwell, Shane Jacobs, Diane Kane, Leslie Lowe, Tracy Rossi, Kathy Skemp ABSENT: Paul McElroy STAFF: Wendy Compton-Ring PUBLIC COMMENT: none MINUTES: The minutes from May 5, 2020 were unanimously approved. OLD BUSINESS Holly Stevenson, unaddressed W 8th Street, duplex (ARC 20-13) The applicant presented the changes discussed at the previous meeting including changes to size of materials, landscaping and front door color. Garbage with the bear proof containers will be in the parking lot with the cars. There was discussion about the existing fence and the existing landscaping. Shane – the buildable area is pretty small; what material is the fascia? Soffit is LP, fascia, post and beam will be stained wood This will tie it in better; would like to see the trash wheeled units so they can be located away from the front and screened from view. Leslie – what is the width of the sidewalk in front of the unit 4-feet; planning to take advantage of the existing landscaping on-site Kathy – appreciate the changes from the previous meeting Motion: Shane – moves to approve as presented with the clarification, fascia stained wood, soffit white LP Tracy – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passed unanimously Town Pump, 6045 Highway 93 S, CWG Architects (ARC 19-63) The applicant presented an update to the Arch Review Committee since their last meeting in January. Since they met, the City Council approved their Conditional Use Permit. The applicant described the revisions to the site plan as a result of the CUP conditions including: changes to the 1 retaining walls, pedestrian connections, revisions to the site plan in order to preserve the existing trees, the sidewalk along Highway 93 S will be widening to 10-feet and vehicle charging stations will be located along the west. Leslie – Is there a possibility of adding a sidewalk along the east driveway or is it too steep? It would be about 10% grade. The roadway is about 20-foot and could be widened a bit with an asphalt ‘bike/walk’ lane or a concrete sidewalk. Would like to see something like that – either option. Increase the width 3-4’ and delineate with striping. Leslie – the stairs are logical, especially mid-block Tracy – reading through the minutes, retaining wall was a concern The Committee reviewed the image with the retaining wall, the materials and the rendering Shane – asked about materials of the different retaining walls; the retaining wall to the east and along the internal road is proposed to be a rough faced CMU wall; the retaining wall adjacent to the building is proposed to be a ‘cast in stone’ design and stained to match the building; stronger retain walls with the concrete/stone – can minimize the impact to the trees due to no back excavation Tracy – what is the material color/material? Showed a picture of the proposed material/color of the retaining wall material and showed a sample of the cast in place with stain Kathy – Asked for a summary of changes to the building since their January meeting. West side of the building – added a covered area that links to the landscaping – meeting the City Council requirements and the zoning requirement. Kathy – did the exterior patio change; the patio paving area got a little bit larger Showed the location of the refuse – located within a retaining wall so it won’t be visible from the highway Leslie – suggested flaring the sidewalk connection between the shared bike path/sidewalk to the store a bit to be a bit more welcoming to the users coming from the south Kathy – the canopy edge was an unresolved issue from the previous meeting. Stone on the building matching the columns, the eyebrow overhang matches the island roof feature on the building; colors on the island will be muted; white metal around the edge to match the building Shane – the roof? Wanted to minimize the roof – adding a roof made it seem large and imposing Kathy – any other color beside white? Thought it might be better during our wintery climate but could change the color. They are trying to figure out a color that blends in the best. Could be an off-white? Will provide a copy of the color for the Committee. Tracy – What are the gray colors? There is a bondarized finish on the building that could be extended to the canopy. There is also a gray-taupe color that might be a good choice. Shane – good to use the same color as it would match what is on the building Tracy – fuel stations would be a metal yes, want to make them light for constructability Kathy – thoughts from the other committee members? Shane – not corrugated? Correct – flat profile Tracy, Shane, Leslie – all agreed the white fascia to match the white band at the entrance and the gray-taupe color for the top of the canopy Further Committee discussion about off-white vs. bright white Leslie – would look best if it matches the sign 2 Dan – can’t change the proprietary sign colors Kathy – besides the signs – any other white? On the west elevation near the patio on top of the wood element Shane – asked clarifying questions about materials No yellow, as shown on rendering, pipe bollards – gray Shane – clarifying opaque glass versus vision glass windows. The applicant went around the building describing opaque glass versus vision glass Kathy – appreciates all the changes from the previous items; any issues tabling the project? Can we identify items as conditions? The next meeting would be in 2 weeks. Kathy – would like to see the full drawings and all changes clarified on one complete submittal Shane – thinks it keeps it cleaner; Town Pump has really submitted a full complete submittal and challenge all the Whitefish architects to make a full submittal like this project; tricky site and add the CUP process – they have done a very nice job Motion: Shane – move to table subject to changes discussed Tracy – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passes unanimously NEW BUSINESS *** Leslie Lowe Recused Herself from the Following Project *** E 7th Street and Pine Ave, 7-plex, Dia Sullivan (ARC 20-16) The applicant described the project, site plan, landscaping, parking (one-way from Pine Ave to E 7th Street), trash enclosure, bike rack area, building and materials. Tracy – snow shed off the roof? Composite roof and eaves; the roof will not slough snow. Kathy - railings? Black steel Doors and windows? Black Fascia and trim? Gray Balcony floors? Composite; Sonotubes poured in culvert and finished on top with a steel plate that nearly covers the entire culvert Kathy – cool project Diane – likes the location of the parking in the back; concerned about the fencing where pedestrians will be coming down the sidewalk the applicant will address this either move the fence or some other design solution Stacy – appreciates the design, good use of space, thoughtful landscaping and appreciates the parking in the back Shane – appreciates the density and walkability; care in the detail of the visible sprinkler heads – screen or at a minimum paint matching color yes screened and/or painted depending on location 3 Tracy – likes the building and likes the backside, likes the garages in the back and have a true front yard Motion: Tracy – move to approved as submitted; with change the angle of the fence on the west corner Shane – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passed unanimously *** Leslie Lowe Rejoined the Meeting *** Wich House, 105 Wisconsin Ave, Richard Morken (ARC 20-17) The applicant described the project, windows, doors and color – small 7’ x 7’ project. Kathy – what is the addition for? A new bathroom for the outside diners Shane – there is not a lot of detail on the drawings The Committee asked a number of questions about the specifics of the project and noted if some of these things aren’t thought through they could have an impact on the design Tracy – would like to see some additional detail on the drawings; they could be misinterpreted Currently it is a door into the bathroom and will generally be the same thing; the building materials will be the same Kathy – the concept is fine; will the bathroom be required to be ADA compliant or not? This could effect the design Tracy – more detailed drawings – where is the outdoor area, how is the site is tied together? Could take some extra photos of the back area and show the fire pit Diane – didn’t get a schematic floor plan this help to understand the exterior Kathy – relative to grade – three steps or is the grade going to be raised up, how much of the foundation will be exposed; how does it relate to the site; how does one access the door Leslie – what is the size of the existing porch? About 5 x 5 The addition is double the size of the existing landing and she believe this is what the Committee is struggling with. These questions should be able to be answered on the plans. Motion: Leslie – move to table until a more complete submittal is received Tracy – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passed unanimously 4 OTHER ITEMS Council directed amendments. Kathy asked the Committee to get comments directly to Wendy and review the photos. Leslie has photos that might be helpful. She’ll forward them to Wendy. Meeting adjourned at 11:18 AM 5