Architectural Review Committee

WHITEFISH ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES January 5, 2021 The meeting was called to order by Kathy Skemp at 8:15AM PRESENT: Stacy Caldwell, Shane Jacobs, Diane Kane, Leslie Lowe, Paul McElroy, Tracy Rossi, Kathy Skemp ABSENT: none STAFF: Wendy Compton-Ring PUBLIC COMMENT: none MINUTES: The minutes from December 1, 2020 were unanimously approved. OLD BUSINESS Façade Change, 1000 Wisconsin Avenue, Solus Architects (ARC 20-29) Applicant described changes, material changes and colors. A tenant has been found for the building and had some last-minute changes to the building and are shown on the plans being presented this morning. Committee had material questions Tracy – why removed window next to front door? Tenant wanted this look and will locate their sign in that location. Kathy – questions about whether The Quarry has reviewed it? Design was sent to the group and will let us know if they approve of it Paul – would be helpful to see the final mocked up samples Traci – what is the awning? Welded tube steel with steel tie back rods Paul – true cover no – just break up the front Still working with the HVAC engineers to figure out the roof equipment and screening needs Paul – location of signage to the left of the front door Tracy – it’s a nice improvement Leslie – move the bike rack to the plaza area to the NE – away from the handicap area. that seems like a good idea Paul – will the coffee kiosk change? No, it will stay the same so the buildings will be a bit different. They have a different colored stain and the coffee kiosk has white brick; however the style is very similar. A rendering with both could be provided for the Committee Paul – would like to make sure they complement each other. The applicant thinks a mock- up would be helpful 1 Leslie – agrees, some continuity between the two bldgs. will be important and is worth re- visiting; appreciates the simplicity of the new building Shane – agrees with the bike rack comments, re-selecting something other than CO Spruce, would be good to see something a bit more comprehensive: show the materials, the HVAC screening, and The Quarry sign-off; could support a motion to table action today along with all the Committee comments included Tracy – significant improvement to what is there; make sure all parties are agreeable to the design Diane – agrees with tabling; would like to have everything settled and ready to go Motion: Leslie – move to table to the next meeting to incorporate the Committee comments Shane – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passes unanimously NEW BUSINESS Austin Triplex, 725 W 2nd Street, triplex, John Constenius (ARC 21-01) The applicant described the project (existing home, moving an existing home and adding an additional unit above a new 3-car garage), its location, surrounding neighborhood and materials. Kathy – interesting concept; looks like Whitefish Committee had several questions about the materials and colors Kathy – garage door color? the trim color Paul – Thinks it looks good, the screening will help it blend in; likes the design; likes the colors Stacy – driveway material asphalt Leslie – suggested something to break up the asphalt; likes the entries to each unit with a sidewalk; the black asphalt will change the feeling of the front entrance; something along the edging to reduce the asphalt. The applicant thinks it will look like a courtyard; maybe some increased screening to the east, but doesn’t think it will be overwhelming Tracy – likes the feel of it and the positioning of the building Diane – nothing more to add; for the size of the property there is a lot of living space; good use of space Paul – likes it, no suggestions Motion: Tracy – move to approve, as submitted Paul – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passes unanimously 2 North Valley Food Bank, addition, 251 Flathead Avenue, MT Creative (ARC 21-04) The applicant described the project, its location and materials. It is an existing building with an addition that will complement the existing building – form, materials and color. Tracy – any windows in the addition? No, it’s a big walk-in cooler. The stone columns will be on the front and sides of the building. The additions steps back a bit. Kathy – will the area to the east of the addition be enclosed in fencing. Don’t want to change the stormwater pond to the east Leslie – only comment – provide some fencing less transparent to provide better screening; agrees would like something with a bit more screening. How many employees – a few employees along with a number of volunteers; meter out volunteers, users of the Food Bank and the suppliers Is there a spot for a picnic table? Might not be a space, but it’s good to make an outdoor space for users of the building Paul – agrees with the garbage screening. Questions about the height of the wainscot. No other comments; blends well and is much needed Motion: Leslie – move to approve as submitted Stacy – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passes unanimously Stumptown Snowboard, 128 Central Avenue, addition, MT Creative (ARC 21-02) The applicant described the project, its location and materials. Recently did a pre-ap with the Committee. The materials will match the existing materials on the front of the building. They are providing a space within the parking area for future mural(s). No blue – was going to be a sign but the owner changed their mind. No plans for lighting on the 2nd floor Leslie – likes it, nice job Tracy – employee only entrance? Correct – the public will continue to enter off Central Avenue. Looks nice Stacy – agrees with the materials matching the front Diane – likes the colors; looks good; likes the continuity between the front and back Paul – railing on the 2nd floor? Proposing a low wall for privacy with a black metal railing for safety Likes the same theme Motion: Tracy – move to approve as submitted Paul – 2nd Discussion: none Vote: motion passes unanimously 3 205 Central Ave, façade change (ARC 21-03) The applicant described the project, its location. The project is a two-phase project: 1) remove the green wood siding to reveal the original brick underneath and 2) repair the water damaged awning but possibly complete a full replacement if the damage is too great. Leslie – happy to see the return to the brick Kathy – might need to table it? Or have a two-part approval Tracy – pleased to see the removal of the green siding Stacy – straight forward and an important upgrade on Central Avenue Diane – agrees with the proposal Shane – in favor of the two-part approval process; wondered if there is a 2nd floor and any windows; 17-foot 1st floor not sure if there are windows; there is an advantage to coming back; could find something interesting underneath the wood siding Motion: Tracy – move to approve the removal of the wood siding and come back to let the Committee know what’s to be done with the awning and/or what is discovered with the brick Shane – 2nd Discussion: Paul - What happens if it is a disaster under the wood? Will come back with some sort of design? What is the timeframe? The applicant will be back at the next meeting and they will be getting into the front of the building within the next week and a half. Vote: motion passes unanimously OTHER ITEMS Monterra, Phase 2, Brandon Prinzing, Pre-Ap The team presented the thought process and design concepts for Monterra Phase 2. Paul – likes the design concept; unfortunately, many times once value engineering gets ahold of projects they get stripped down; really likes everything and the details; pulled it off ‘if’ the level of details happen Kathy – no official action; doesn’t really like the transparent type of garage doors; shed roof is the ‘Mtn Modern’ somehow include pitch; likes the site layout Leslie –agrees with the comments; likes the layout and the buffers; architecture is interesting; ensure there is adequate space for the trees along the streets Diane – space for interaction and private spaces – both are important; noise from upstairs neighbors; hope it ages well; light into the garages – maybe the full glass isn’t quite right, but some sort of lighting Tracy – liked the comments from Paul; maintaining the details and material choices so it doesn’t become a project the community doesn’t like; likes the density and the feel and space of the project 4 Stacy – really nice use of the space and the open space areas; loves the architecture; keep the details; nice way to build off of Phase 1 How are they doing meeting the garage-forward standards: OK – due to the green space, entrances and the landscaping, works well Shane – the entire site plan is a nice extension of Phase 1; likes the architecture is different but with similar scale; caution to not use too much material changes – seems like we are right there but it doesn’t get too busy; agrees with Paul and the level of detail is nice and will hopefully be maintained. Building height provides a nice interior space, meets the zoning standard and they had a lot of discussion about roof styles Shane – likes the butterfly roof design; like the simpler design – helps with long-term maintenance; better than just a shed roof Described the floorplans – all units have 2-bedrooms this is what the market is showing them Tracy – could be a market for 3-bedroom units 124-134 W 2nd Street, Kevin Nolen, Pre-Ap The architect presented the thought process and design concepts for Whitefish River Run development. Paul – it would be unique to Whitefish Kathy – Any treatment to enhance the front entry door? More detail to come for the front façade (Lighting, Landscaping). There is a large willow tree to be preserved and will attempt to preserve as many as possible Tracy – looks forward to seeing the landscaping and additional details; unique to WF and look forward to next edition Leslie – lots of stairs within the units; did the designers think about our Senior community Paul – the street side is pretty important Shane – appreciates the rendered images; material palette; W 2nd Street will be important; symmetry; chimney design is a little odd that it doesn’t go all the way to the ground; questions about the minimal overhang and the clipped corners on the north side Paul – likes the riverside; being a bit of pioneer on the road side *** Shane left the meeting – 11:09AM *** Design for the future and not just for today Paul – the street side is a bit risky Stacy – described the challenges with the WF winter and how the design of the project might make this challenging Diane – agrees with Stacy; discussed maintenance of the project; looks forward to seeing the real materials and the colors Other concerns about the W 2nd Street elevation? Paul – not sure if it is the flat elevation, long length of the eave without change Tracy – it will be helpful to see the full project with the landscaping, materials, details; looks forward to seeing it 715 Cottonwood Court The request for C of O revealed the final design is quite a bit different than what was approved. The Committee would like to visit with the builder about 5 the changes before we sign off on the C of O. Staff left him a message yesterday but didn’t hear from him. Will try to get ahold of him and schedule for the next meeting. Preservation and Destruction of Trees Leslie and Stacy will be working on a draft letter to the City Council to discuss the destruction of trees in a couple of recent project and recommend they amend the Landscaping Chapter to place more priority on existing trees and stiff penalties for tree destroyed during construction. They will bring this letter back to the next meeting for review so the letter will be from the Committee. Meeting adjourned at 11:20 AM 6