03-22-16 Architectural Review Committee MinutesMINUTES
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
DATE: Tuesday, March 22, 2016; 7:30 a.m.
Kalispell City Hall, 201 1" Ave E
MEMBERS PRESENT: John Hinchey; Mark Norley (Chairman); Bill Goodman;
Julie Pierrottet; David Koel; Janet Clark
OTHERS PRESENT: City Staff—PJ Sorensen; Guests —2 guests
Hear the Public: None
Approval of Minutes: Bill moved to approve February 23 minutes; John seconded.
Approved 6-0.
Old Business:
Immanuel Lutheran — 185 Crestline; revision of previously approved plans for
expansion of existing nursing home. Not doing the parking lot expansion and dropping
the portico, which may be added back in at a later date. Still matching materials/look of
existing building. David moved to approve; Julie seconded. Approved 6-0. They also
gave an update on drawings for the remainder of the project. Discussed openings along
the lower parking area and the roof mass at the entry.
New Business:
Kalispell Toyota — 2845 Hwy 93 S; refacing existing freestanding sign. Bill moved to
approve; John seconded. Approved 6-0.
Shops (Spring Prairie 4) — Hwy 93 N, new retail shell. They can't make it, so we left it
on for preliminary comments and no action. This is a very important location. It sets the
"cornerstone" for Spring Prairie 4, and should provide a visual anchor for the rest of the
development that not only sets the tone for the rest of the buildings, but also makes the
corner a unique, pleasing entry to the development as people approach through the main
intersection (rather than be known as "the building across from McDonalds"). In order to
achieve that, there are several things they should do. One would be a better eastern face
of the building (facing the highway). The elevation could be improved with awnings
and/or screening of the doors, etc, for example. While it is more of the service side of the
building, we do stress four-sided architecture. The highway and northern sides of the
building are really the key because that is what the community sees. If the building/drive
thru needs to be oriented the way that it is, those visual impacts need to be
mitigated. Along those same lines, the garbage collection area along the right-of-way
would not be the best location and would prefer to see some alternatives. In regard to the
site layout, it was a little difficult to see the entire picture because we have not received
the landscape plan. If the plan shows extensive landscaping with berming and a mix of
types of shrubs and trees (including evergreens), that could go a long ways towards
helping achieve the look that ARC believes is necessary at this location. They also need
to avoid repetitive design (e.g. how would this corner look different than the Verizon
intersection and building) while still maintaining a cohesive approach. ARC requested
some information on some of their other developments to see how they were designed as
a way to help generate some ideas and options. ARC would like a copy of the email sent
to the developer.
Other Discussion: None
Meeting Adjourned at 8:45 a.m.