Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBozeman Commons MSP-SP 17040 & 17041 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 1 of 20 Application No. 17040 17041 Type Master Site Plan, First Phase Site Plan, CCOA, Deviation MSP, SP, CCOA, Dev Project Name Bozeman Commons Master Plan with First Phase Office Building Summary A Master Site Plan application with Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and Deviation review for the phased construction of five commercial mixed use buildings, accessory uses, common parking, access and circulation, to be integrated with existing commercial development on the north side of E. Main Street. The area is currently vacant and partly occupied by five non-conforming residential structures proposed for demolition. A first phase Site Plan with Certificate of Appropriateness application proposes construction of a 2-story office building of approximately 17,147 sq. ft. with related improvements to the site immediately east of the existing 1019 East Main Street structure. The MSP proposal includes a Deviation request per Bozeman Municipal Code Sections 38.25.020, 38.17.080, and 38.17.060 for a 20% reduction of the 25-foot entryway corridor setback. Zoning B-2 Growth Policy Community Commercial Mixed Use Size 4.29 acres Overlay District East Main Street Entryway Corridor Overlay (Class 2) Street Address 1107, 1113, 1117 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 Legal Description Block 28, Lot 2C (Plat C-23-A21), Lots 10&11 plus, N42' Lots 22-23 50’x260’ plus adj. streets and alleys 101’x260'; and Tract 25'x100' Northern Pacific Add., S07, T02 S, R06 E, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Owner/applicant JBL LLC, 1007 East Main Street, Suite 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative Laura Dornberger, Locati Architects, 1007 East Main St., Ste. 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Planner Brian Krueger Engineer Shawn Kohtz Noticing Public Comment Period Adjacent Owners Mailed Site Posted Newspaper 2/22/17-3/28/17 2/6/17 2/6/17 2/19/17 2/26/17 Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation DRC 1/18/17 Inadequate DRC 4/5/17 Inadequate DRC 5/3/17 tent. TBD DRB 4/26/17 TBD Recommendation Approve with conditions Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date TBD Alternatives 1. Recommend approval of the application with the recommended findings conditions and code provisions provided in the staff report; 2. Recommend approval of the application with modifications to the recommended conditions and findings provided in the staff report; 3. Recommend denial of the application based on the Board’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. With the applicant’s concurrence continue the review of the application with specific direction to staff or the applicant to address specific items. Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 2 of 20 Project Location DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 3 of 20 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law 2. The applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard b) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane The document filed shall specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. This is a condition of master site plan approval. The applicant must file this document with the County Clerk and Recorder and provide a filed copy with the application materials prior to master site plan approval. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. Plan Review, Section 38.19.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: 1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy (38.01.040 C) Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Community Commercial Mixed Use Yes Zoning B-2, Community Business Yes Comments: The uses are allowed within the zoning district. The property is within the City’s municipal service area and otherwise complies with the goals and objectives of the growth policy. No conflicts between the proposed uses, zoning and the growth policy are identified. 2. Conformance to this chapter, including the cessation of any current violations (38.34.160) Meets Code? Current Violations None Yes Comments: The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.01.080) Meets Code? Conflicts None Yes Condominium ownership NA Yes Comments: To accommodate for the proposed construction of buildings across lot lines and associated development layout, either a subdivision exemption or a restrict lot transfer agreement DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 4 of 20 is required. The applicant has provided the latter. The plans will be evaluated against the requirements of the International Building Code (IBC) during building permit review. The applicant must provide professional services for construction inspection, post-construction certifications from their project professionals that the project was constructed according to plan and specification. Required certification includes compliant ADA accessibility verification. 4. Relationship of site plan elements to conditions both on and off the property (38.19.100) Meets Code? Neighborhood Compatibility Yes Design and arrangement of plan to produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes, with correction Design and arrangement of plan in harmony with topography, water bodies, vegetation, contributing to the overall aesthetics Yes Conform with local historical or landmark designation requirements, including the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) NA Relationship to other plans (subdivision/master site plan, PUD, etc.) Bozeman Commons Master Plan Yes, but master plan approval pending Comments: The proposed project is compatible with the general pattern of commercial development as the proposed buildings for Phase 4, with grant of a deviation for a reduced front yard/entryway corridor setback, are located in alignment with existing development along the roadway. Bozeman Commons is aesthetically and functionally an extension of the adjacent commercial development located at 1007 and 1019 East Main Street to the west. The proposed master site plan and Phase 1 are well-matched to but distinct from the existing Parkview Building and Mountain View Building on the adjacent properties to the west, and to the broader neighborhood context. A few blocks further to the east on East Main Street consists of similar architectural styles, including the F&H Building (Rocking R Bar) Parking is internal to the site. The vehicular accesses including a new secondary access on the east portion of the property provide safe and reasonable access to the site. A still-pending public easement at the northeast corner of the property will provide the option for future neighborhood circulation, to link the proposed Phase 2 parking area and drive aisle to the current dead-end access from Main Street near the Exxon business on East Main Street and/or the Village Downtown neighborhood, located to the north. 5. The impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions (38.24.010 and 38.25.010) Meets Code? Street vision No Yes, with corrections Snow storage No Traffic Impact Study / LOS No Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Yes, with improvements Comments: City Engineering has identified a code correction per BMC Section 38.25.020.M. The applicant must provide adequate snow storage areas and demonstrate these areas and sufficient capacity on the plans prior to master site plan approval. This project is required to support off-site improvements to local streets or intersections. Specifically, Section 38.24.060.B.4 states: All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 5 of 20 methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole. According to City Engineering and traffic studies, the intersection of Highland Boulevard and East Main Street is operating at a LOS less than “C”. The solution to correct the LOS at the intersection is to add capacity. The intersection of Highland and Main must be upgraded prior to any phase site plan approval for the subject project. Alternatively, the applicant must obtain a waiver prior to any phase site plan approval per BMC Section 38.24.060.4.bBMC Section 38.24.060.4.b states an exception: The review authority may grant a waiver from a LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if the review authority determines: (1) Granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest; (2) Improvements to the intersection to raise the overall level of service to a "C" or better are currently scheduled for commencement of construction within three years as shown on the most recently adopted transportation capital improvement plan; (3) All right-of-way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been obtained by the city or by the Montana Department of Transportation; and (4) The commission has approved a financing plan for the intersection improvements. The in-progress Blackmore Bend development to the east on East Main Street proposes to construct improvements to the intersection in the form of turn lanes and signal modifications, pending approval of right-of-way and a financing plan for intersection improvements, which the subject applicant may be party to. The applicant is eligible to request concurrent construction of the intersection and the phase 1 office building. Parking Required Provided (total) Yes, with correction Total 219 total; 58 in Ph 1 219 total; 61 in Ph 1 Yes ADA 11 total; 3 in Ph 1 8 total; 2 in Ph 1 No Reduction Ph 2 & Ph 3 residential adjustment per Table 38.25.040-2 Yes Bicycle Ph 1 (6); Ph 2 (3); Ph 3 (3); Ph 4A (6) and 4B (7) = 25 total Comments: Parking requirements are met for the proposed Master Site Plan and Phase 1 development based on proposed uses, which are primarily office, with some residential. Eleven (11) spaces are proposed as structured parking on the groundfloor level of future mixed use Buildings 2 and 3 (5 and 6 each, respectively). The applicant provided a signed joint parking and access agreement between all property ownership members, to be executed with a copy sent to Planning for the final site plan upon application approval. A joint parking calculation table and demonstration of adequate provisions will be verified with ensuing plan submittals for future phases and may require a Modification to the Master Site Plan if the distribution of provisions between phases changes based on different proposed uses, etc. The design must be corrected for accessible space provisions to match the requirements by building instead of providing 2 spaces per building. Eleven (11) ADA surface parking spaces in total are required with 5 of them being van accessible. Then 2% of the covered spaces must be DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 6 of 20 ADA in addition to the 11 required open spaces. Guidance has been provided by the Building Division. 6. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress (38.19.100) Meets Code? Safe and easy movement Yes Pedestrian access location(s) Yes Site vision triangles Yes, with corrections Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Vehicle access to site 2 on East Main Street Yes, with corrections Special Improvement Districts 2 Waiver No Yes, with corrections Comments: Pedestrian access into the development is provided at each drive access location. Clearly demarcated pedestrian crossings to traverse each drive access and also to provide direct access between each building in the development are proposed for adequate internal circulation in the complex. The development’s design provides temporary barricades at phase terminations where a drive aisle or parking area is intended to be extended in a future phase and does not terminate with curb and gutter to keep vehicle traffic on pavement. Per 38.24.100.C and D, the Street Vision triangle is a triangular area where corners are defined by two points on the right-of-way line, 15 feet on each side of the centerline of the driveway or alley and a point on centerline ten feet outside the right-of-way. Any driveway or alley wider than 30 feet curb to curb at the right-of-way line shall use the vision triangle standard for local streets when intersecting local, collector, or arterial streets. The street vision triangle must be amended to conform to part C of this section, as the subject access is a driveway intersecting an arterial street. Per Sec.36.04.180, fire lane dimensions and striping must be shown on the site plan. All necessary curbs shall be striped and signed as “Fire Lane No Parking”. Designated fire lanes must provide adequate access for any and all emergency vehicles and must be approved by the Bozeman Fire Department. “No parking” signage locations must be shown on the site plan along shared access easement areas. The applicant indicates that the Fire Division is satisfied with provisions for Phase 1 and will review implementation of related requirements as necessary with future development phases. As a condition of master site plan approval, the applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: 1) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard, and 2) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane. In addition, the second access from East Main must be approved by MDT. Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems design features to enhance safety and convenience Yes Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular transportation systems Yes Comments: Pedestrian access to the building and site is supported through the project’s provision of sidewalks along street frontage, drive accesses, and with internal sidewalks to connect the buildings and parking areas. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 7 of 20 Code section 38.24.110, transportation pathways, provides the requirements for transportation pathways including maintenance and easements. The PROST plan calls for a transportation pathway on the far northeast side of the plan, crossing the existing Village Downtown trail corridor. A trail connection may be required with future phases. Coordination with the future Parklands project team for development of parcels to the north and east is recommended. Dedication of right-of-way or easements necessary for streets and similar transportation facilities Yes, with corrections Comments: The development design identifies structures crossing lot lines. The site is not proposed to be reconfigured through a subdivision exemption process to relocate the common boundary lines to accommodate the site layout. Instead, a Restricted Transfer of Deeds agreement has been crafted to prohibit independent sale of the lots in perpetuity and meets code requirements. The proposed development design adequately arranges drive accesses and aisles to provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent developed properties for the convenient movement of traffic, effective provision of emergency services and efficient provision of utilities. Internal vehicular circulation and parking are ensured through the applicant’s provision of a Mutual and reciprocal Access Easement and Zero Lot Line Agreement. An easement is also proposed for reciprocal and mutual access between the subject development and adjacent property to the east, the current location of the Buggy Bath carwash, in order to provide for a second site access. As a code correction, BMC 38.24.010.A.2 states: The developer shall arrange the streets to provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent developed properties when such continuation is necessary for the convenient movement of traffic, effective provision of emergency services and efficient provision of utilities. The applicant must provide a public access easement along a drive lane between E. Main Street and the northeast corner of the property prior to master site plan approval. Vehicular access for ingress/egress to the Development is provided through two access points. The second East Main Street access on the east portion, which is proposed as a shared drive access with the adjacent Buggy Carwash property, must be approved by the Montana Department of Transportation prior to Development approval and will be provided in Phase 1. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.24.090.D.3 states: These standards apply to the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and intersections, and the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and other public and/or private accesses. The Development still requires execution of an agreement for improvements to the intersection of East Main Street and Highland Boulevard in order to function. 7. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular use, open space, and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of natural vegetation (38.26.010-100) Meets Code? Submittal requirements for landscape plans (38.41.100) Yes, with corrections Mandatory landscaping Yes, with corrections Yard Yes Additional screening Yes, with corrections DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 8 of 20 Parking lot screening Yes Off-street loading spaces screening NA Street frontage Yes Internal Parking lot landscaping Yes Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, source, system type Exempt well water, drip & spray Trees for residential adjacency Yes Performance points B2 with residential adjacency 23 Yes City rights-of-way and parks Yes Tree plantings for boulevard ROW, drought-resistant seed Yes Public ROW boulevard strips Yes Irrigation and maintenance provisions for ROW Yes State ROW landscaping Yes Additional NA None NA Fencing and walls Yes Comments: A landscape plan was submitted with the master site plan and Phase 1 application for all proposed landscaping on the site as required by Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) and is generally in compliance with all standards. The plan legend must be updated to include all plantings proposed on the drawing and screening for residential adjacency along the full perimeter of the northern property line. All landscaped areas are provided with permanent underground irrigation system service that includes water efficient drip-lines along turf areas. Street trees comply with City of Bozeman forestry regulations, as proposed and will be provided with individual development phases (i.e., Phase 4). Additional landscaping has been proposed around the building pads for 4A and 4B, in addition to existing and planned pedestrian hardscape, as a requirement of approval for the COA and requested deviation from setback standards. Please refer to the deviation narrative provided by the applicant, and note that auxiliary, “exemplary” landscaping improvements may include: a public plaza with benches and plantings located adjacent to the street frontage; an enhanced southern elevation with landscaped planters and tree grates to support canopy cover and a texturally-rich, aesthetically-welcoming transition from the public to private development realms; additional landscaping along the side perimeters of Phase 4A and 4B buildings; custom-designed bike racks or pedestrian shelters; artwork; and additional year-round landscape screening of utilities. Per plan submittal requirement and application Form A1, the applicant has signed a statement that the landscaping is to be completed per the approved master landscaping plan and subject site plan. Ensuing site plans will require phase-specific landscape plan details, such as to display benches, etc., and may require modifications to the approved master plan, if significantly different. 8. Open space (38.27.020) Meets Code? Enhancement of natural environment NA Wildlife habitat or feeding area preservation NA Maintenance of public park or public open space access NA Recreational area design NA Open space Assessed with future plans DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 9 of 20 Parkland Cash-in-lieu for maximum known density not to exceed 12 units/acre (ac.). Assessed with future plans ___ ac. X ___ units/ac. X 0.03 ac.= _____ ac. Cash donation in-lieu NA NA Improvements in-lieu NA NA Comments: The required open space will be revised with future plan applications for phases 2 and 3 based on current information and is not applicable to the Phase 1 or Master Plan approval process. The City requires parkland dedication for residential uses. If parkland dedication cannot be met on-site the applicant must request City Commission approval to provide cash-in-lieu of parkland. Parkland CILP proposals must go before the RPAB for recommendation on the proposal prior to being placed on the City Commission consent agenda as a formal request for approval. The official parkland dedication requirement amount and approach will be established when individual site plans are proposed for future phases. For example, a recent appraisal established $1.23/SF or $53,578.80/acre, which would amount to $17,681 for the subject project’s proposed 11 dwelling units. Additional open space is provided via required yard, landscaping and entryway corridor requirements. 9. Building location and height (38.19.100) Meets Code? Zoning B2 Requirements (38.10.030-.060) Yes Lot coverage 25% 8,347 footprint /171,353 lot area (2C Ph. 1) Allowed 100% (except yards, parking) Height 38’ Allowed 38’ Yes Comments: B-2 zoning requirements are met for building height and lot coverage, as proposed for Phase 1. 10. Setbacks (38.19.100) Meets Code? Zoning B2 Yards (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes, upon Deviation approval. Front 25 25 Rear 10 10 Side 5 8 Alley NA NA Watercourse NA Entryway corridor 25 Block Frontage [insert type] NA NA Comments: The proposed development configuration does not propose adjustment of common boundary lines to meet the setback and individual service requirements of each building. Instead, a restricted transfer of deeds agreement has been signed by required parties and will be executed to effectively meet such requirements. The master site plan design includes a Deviation request per BMC 38.25.020, 38.17.080, and 38.17.060 for a 20% reduction of the 25-foot entryway corridor setback. Refer to the last section of this staff report for analysis and staff recommendation. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 10 of 20 11. Lighting (38.23.150) Meets Code? Building-mounted lighting (cutoff and temperature) Yes Site lighting (cutoff and temperature) Yes Minimum light trespass at property line Yes Comments: All light fixtures are full cutoff and the edge of the property shows no light trespass. The project employs LED technology, the City’s recommended bulb type. A common parking lot lighting pole fixture style is proposed throughout the site to provide a coordinated style with associated adjacent development to the west. 12. Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities (38.21.030, 38.23.050, 38.23.060, 38.23.070) Meets Code? Municipal infrastructure requirements Yes Easements (utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes, with corrections Water, sewer and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water Yes, with payment Sanitation vehicle access 3 trash collection enclosures are proposed Yes, with corrections Comments: The project is located on parcels of land that are served by municipal infrastructure. Plans were reviewed by the City Engineer and have been found to adequately provide adequate water, sewer and other needed infrastructure. Per BMC 38.23.070.A.1, the application provides detail for the installation of complete municipal facilities designed in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality the City’s Design Standards and Specifications. Several easements must be executed and recorded to provide access for the above public utility provisions. Utility easements are required to be submitted for water, sewer and private utilities. BMC Section 38.23.060.C.1 states: A public utility easement shall be granted for all public utility mains not located within public street right-of-way The project has received code requirement corrections through the Development Review Committee related to these items. Specifically, the applicant must provide a minimum 30-foot wide easement for the proposed water main extended into the project site prior to any site plan approval. In addition, the applicant must provide documentation of easements over the existing sanitary sewer mains on the site. If the easements do not exist, the applicant must provide easements for the sewer mains. Another required correction is for a ten-foot front yard utility easement and associated dimensions as relates to the right-of-way to be identified and shown consistently on the application drawings in the front yard of all lots along East Main Street per section 38.23.060.B. Cash in-lieu of water rights has been estimated by City Engineering for each building; refer to communications (email 1/9/17) with City Engineering in the Phase 1 application for details. Final fee requirements and payment are required per site plan phase and prior to final approval. Irrigation water is proposed to be served by an existing exempt well that received DEQ approval. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 11 of 20 Several corrections have been advised as relates to setback distance and where trash enclosures are located. Per Sec. 38.23.170, trash and garbage enclosures, the enclosure must provide a minimum of 50’ of a straight approach to the front of the enclosure. With the addition of the east access drive, the garbage access for the existing car wash needs to be changed. Backing a garbage truck out of the car wash into the access drive will create a public safety issue and the design must address this issue. In addition, the Solid Waste Division requires the design to be revised to move all concrete-filled steel bollards within garbage enclosures to 6-8 inches from the rear inside wall. With the addition of the east access drive, the Solid Waste Division requires all-weather turn around just east of the garbage enclosure for proposed office building 1. Each garbage enclosure’s minimum inside dimensions for access through the door opening is 10 feet. Doors on the garbage enclosure should be raised 12 inches off the ground to make sure they open easily over snow. 13. Site surface drainage (38.23.080) Meets Code? Drainage design Yes, with correction Stormwater maintenance plan (38.23.030.A) Yes Stormwater feature: landscaping amenity, native species, curvilinear, 75% live vegetation NA Comments: The final development-wide drainage design has been approved by City Engineering. A combination of site grading, curb and gutter, and subsurface on-site detention/retention chamber structures located beneath parking areas will manage stormwater runoff from the site. However temporary stormwater treatment design has not received approval. As a code correction to be resolved, BMC Section 38.23.030.A states: The developer shall install complete drainage facilities in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality and the city, and shall conform to any applicable facilities plan and the terms of any approved site specific stormwater control plan. The city's requirements are contained in the design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications, and by this reference these standards are incorporated into and made a part of these regulations. The temporary ponds must be constructed to the standards of a permanent stormwater pond. The applicant must provide details of pond construction on the plans consistent with the City standard requirements prior to site plan approval. 14. Loading and unloading areas (38.23.140) Meets Code? Loading and unloading NA Yes Comments: No formal loading and unloading areas are proposed with this project. 15. Grading (38.23.080) Meets Code? Grading Yes On-site retention/detention Yes Comments: Grading of the site is anticipated in order to provide proper surface drainage from the site and has been approved by City Engineering. 16. Signage (38.28.010) Meets Code? Allowed (sq. ft)/lot 250 NA Proposed (sq. ft) NA Comments: Not required for site plan approval. The Phase 1 office building proposes 80 sf of signage. A draft comprehensive signage plan narrative was provided which identifies unified design guidelines for metal lettering, font, color, illumination and sign types. Low-profile DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 12 of 20 development signage may be proposed in the future to identify the complex. A comprehensive signage plan must be submitted and permitted independently. 17. Screening (38.21.050 and 38.26.050) Meets Code? Mechanical equipment screening Yes, with clarification Additional screening Yes Comments: Mechanical screening is proposed for the office building, no material sample was provided of the mechanical screen in order to confirm that it will provide full screening of the roof top units (HVAC, etc.). The trash enclosure screening requirements are met and will be verified prior to occupancy being granted. The parking lots are screened with landscaping from the public streets and adjacent residential properties per code. Adequate screening of utility installations in future phases will be reviewed with plan and building permit applications. 18. Overlay district provisions (38.16.010, 38.17.010, 38.18.010) Meets Code? Neighborhood Conservation NA Entryway Yes, with conditions Casino NA Comments: This project is located within the Class 2 East Main Street Entryway Corridor. Staff completed Administrative Design Review to analyze the proposed design’s compliance with the Design Objectives Plan for Entryway Corridors. The master site plan design includes a Deviation request per BMC 38.25.020, 38.17.080, and 38.17.060 for a 20% reduction of the 25-foot entryway corridor setback along East Main Street, which impacts the front yard dimensions for Phase 4 of the development. The DRB must review and make a decision upon the deviation request to ascertain whether it meets associated design performance criteria. Per code, a request for deviation from a standard must be accompanied by written and graphic material sufficient to illustrate the initial and final conditions that the modified standards will produce. The review authority (DRB) shall make a determination that the deviation will (a) produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards, and which will (b) be consistent with the intent and purpose of this article (Article 17, Chapter 38, BMC), and (c) with the adopted design objectives plan for the particular entryway corridor. Upon such a finding, the review authority may authorize deviations of up to 20 percent beyond or below minimum or maximum standards respectively, as established in the underlying zoning district regulations. Refer to the last section of this staff report for analysis and staff recommendation. 19. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties (38.40.010) Meets Code? Public Comment 1 Yes Comments: Public notification and comment is ongoing and in accordance with UDC Chapter 38, Article 40. Refer to noticing dates on page 1 of this report. Staff has received 1 public comment on this project to date. The comment relates to the provision of screening along property line areas with residential adjacency. 20. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or other means of addressing requirement of this title, whether the lots are either: Configured so that the sale of individual lots Meets Code? DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 13 of 20 will not alter the approved configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become nonconforming OR Are the subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or more elements of the development to become nonconforming. (38.23.060) Required Easements and /or boundary aggregation or relocation Yes Yes, with corrections Shared access easement Yes # of lots served 6 Yes Comments: A mutual access and parking configuration is proposed to allow shared access and parking on site. An easement is also proposed for reciprocal and mutual access between the subject development and adjacent property to the east, the current location of the Buggy Bath carwash, in order to provide for a second site access. Buildings cannot be built across property boundaries and the design proposed would maintain its current lot configuration through a restricted transfer agreement of the real property associated with the lots, in order to accommodate the new site layout. This agreement has been drafted and signed and must be executed upon final plan approval The applicant must provide an agreement from the MDT for the new entrance off East Main Street approving that location. The project has received code requirement corrections through the Development Review Committee related to this item. 21. Compliance with article 43 of chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (38.43.010) Meets Code? Affordable Housing NA Yes Comments: This requirement is not applicable to the subject application. 22. Phasing of development (38.41.080) Meets Code? Phasing Yes # of phases 4 Yes Concurrent construction requested Yes Yes, with correction Comments: Four phases are proposed. The majority of the access site improvements and infrastructure will be installed with phase 1. The applicant requests concurrent construction per Sec.38.39.030, completion of improvements. Additional detail must be provided in the application including but not limited to: an irrevocable offer of dedicated public improvements; signed easement for water mains; and stamped approval of the engineering design. DRC’s approval of concurrent construction may be granted as an independent decision from the plan approval. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Entryway Corridor Overlay District Review Attachment 2: Deviation Request Review Attachment 3: Master Plan and Site Plan Applications; Demolition Application DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 14 of 20 ENTRYWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT REVIEW Article 17 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) sanctions the Bozeman Entryway Corridor Overlay District and specifies the standards for granting Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) approval for new construction within an entryway corridor. According to COA standards, criteria from the 2005 Bozeman Design Objectives Plan for Entryway Corridors have been applied to the subject proposal based upon the character of the development and those aspects that can be seen from a public way. Project Address 1107, 1113, 1117 East Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 Application 17040 17041 Existing Site Conditions The subject property is vacant with the exception of five (5) existing residential structures on the eastern portion of the site, which have been approved for demolition and interim site treatment prior to future phases of development. The project is not within a historic district and the existing structures are not considered contributing. Alterations A Master Site Plan application with Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and Deviation review for the phased construction of five commercial mixed use buildings, accessory uses, common parking, access and circulation, to be integrated with existing commercial development on the north side of E. Main Street. The area is currently vacant and partly occupied by five non-conforming residential structures proposed for demolition. A first phase Site Plan with Certificate of Appropriateness application proposes construction of a 2-story office building of approx. 17,000 sq. ft. with related improvements to the site immediately east of the existing 1019 East Main Street structure. The MSP Deviation per Bozeman Municipal Code Sections 38.25.020, 38.17.080, and 38.17.060 requests a 20% reduction of the 25-foot entryway corridor setback. Entryway East Main Street Class 2 Design Criteria and Development Standards in Entryway Corridors (38.17.060) Conforms to Design Objectives Plan NA Conforms to Design Objectives Plan, with Conditions below Yes Does not meet Design Objectives Plan, per Comments below NA A, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL No. Standard Condition 1 A cross-property easement may be used to assure access. (Comment 2) Provide a public access easement across the northeastern property line. 2 Where one must be used, a retaining wall shall blend with the natural features of the setting. (Comment 4) Provide an updated retention wall detail that meets the standard. 3 Define the sidewalk with landscaping, paving and pedestrian-scaled lighting (Comment 6) Provide updated landscape plan, detail sheet, or similar demonstration of the development’s provisions for pedestrian-scaled lighting. 4 Coordinate design features among sets of buildings in a single development. (Comment 9) Address this comment and related standards in the COA review to provide updated development design guidelines that clarify DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 15 of 20 street furnishing quality, pedestrian lighting, plant diversity in Phase 4, primary entrance orientation, solar access, high quality bike racks, roof detail, etc. B. CODE PROVISIONS Per Section 38.01.080 & 38.34.110, the proposed project shall be completed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of Appropriateness application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved application materials shall invalidate the project's legitimacy, unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and approval by the Department of Community Development prior to undertaking said modifications. The only exception to this law is repair. Per Section 38.34.100.6, the applicant shall obtain a building permit within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval, or said approval shall become null and void. Please call the Building Division at 406-582-2375 for more information on the building permit process. C. COA COMMENTS Citations per the Design Objectives Plan. Key issues are underlined below, and any related conditions for master plan and site plan approval are identified above. Where not cited as a condition, comments are advisory or may support compliance with a condition. 1. Objectives of Neighborhood Wide Design (pg. 10) “…The objectives and guidelines are intended to suggest aspects of the design to be addressed by the applicant and the design review authority. The guidelines are meant to indicate preferred conditions, but not without allowing for other equal or better solutions to be considered.” The proposed development design guidelines for Bozeman Commons must take into consideration its relationship to other buildings and site development both within the master plan and to the public street and the adjacent neighborhoods (e.g., Village Downtown and Lindley Park neighborhoods). Design treatments must convey a sense of visual continuity, but refrain from repeating design components and materials, which would be monotonous and lack interest. Because of the location of parking in front of several of the buildings, landscaping components that break up the sense of a parking field and provide pedestrian-scale interest and activity areas in between, which are additional to the façade or plaza areas immediately adjacent to each building and required screening, are key elements of the design. Future site plan submittals will be evaluated for suitability to the development design guidelines, particularly as relates to the provision of “defined exterior organized patio/plaza spaces”. 2. Auto Connections (page 12) “Provide direct automobile access within or to an abutting property when feasible” “Even where an adjoining parcel is presently undeveloped, reserve the opportunity to provide a connection in the future” “A cross-property easement may be used to assure access.” The proposed layout of the northeastern parking area in future phase 2 is conducive to connectivity with the adjacent property to the east and a cross-property public easement would meet this requirement. Code corrections identified in the core staff report address this issue as well. The same portion of the property is also viable as a potential future PROST and/or Village Downtown connection. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 16 of 20 3. Street Character (page 14) “The use of a coordinated set of street furnishings is encouraged.” This requirement is not fully met. A unified design should be more comprehensively identified in the development design guidelines to facilitate product and compliance reviews with future plan applications for street area furnishings and features such as: benches, waste receptacles, textured patio/plaza surfacing, pedestrian-scale lighting, bike parking racks or shelters, decorative walls and/or fences, and tree grates. For example, the proposed distinctive light fixture type for parking areas support this requirement. The Site Details document also identifies a high-grade bench and planter design for the master site plan. However the bike rack detail, while compliant, does not necessarily provide the higher level of interest/site aesthetic performance required for COA and Deviation review and it is unclear what alternative site surfacing features are proposed where there is flexibility in the design of hardscape (e.g., plaza areas). 4. Topography (page 20) “Where one must be used, a retaining wall shall blend with the natural features of the setting.” The proposed retaining wall on the eastern property line identifies a maximum 30’ step between walls and incorporation of some portions with future phase building 3 design. Retaining walls must use native rock or other masonry that conveys a scale and texture similar to that of traditional rock walls. Vera-lok modular concrete units are proposed; while split face block and scored and textured concrete are appropriate please provide more information about the proposed material color and texture for the master site plan landscape approval or such detail will be required with Phase 2. The guideline also requires that if the wall is proposed to be above five feet in height, the plan must utilize terracing and landscaping. The terracing should not be less than three feet in width however the typical section provided does not provide such guidelines and show 2’ 6” spacing. 5. Building Placement (page 23) “Where two of more buildings will be located in a major site development, arrange them in a cluster to define outdoor spaces. Define plazas and courtyards by clustering buildings.” “Organize the public edges of the site to provide visual interest to pedestrians.” “Locate a building entry near the sidewalk edge with an entry plaza and landscape, when feasible…this is especially important for commercial uses.” “A building shall be positioned to fit within the general setback patterns specified for the corridor. Exceptions may be considered if an alternative street edge treatment meets the intent of maintaining the street wall, if a pedestrian place of refuge is provided and is designed as a pedestrian friendly area, and/or if the site is constrained.” “Consider solar orientation and access when siting a building.” The proposed development places buildings along the perimeter, with parking between them, rather than in a cluster such that the definition of outdoor spaces is more challenging however future buildings 4A and 4B share a contiguous space and other plaza areas will be reviewed for detail, access and functionality as proposed with future phases. Future building phases 4A and 4B in particular must comply with this guideline. Future building plans must incorporate windows and a diversity of detailed architectural features to provide visual interest to pedestrians at the ground floor level on the public-facing southern, eastern and western elevations, while ensuring that such four-sided architecture is applied to the northern elevation that addresses primary building access points from the internal parking area. The development design guidelines partly addresses this requirement by identifying the need to complement the existing Parkview and Mountain View architecture to the west and including awnings, canopies, or balconies as accents. The guidelines do not address a preference for fenestration styles (e.g., lintels and moldings), building articulation (e.g. reliefs, recessed entrances and fenestrations), massing, modules DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 17 of 20 and roof details (beyond slope form, e.g., cornice, fascia, cresting). Many such details are demonstrated in the Phase 1 building and existing adjacent development to the west and provision of more granularity in the proposed development design guidelines would facilitate future site plan reviews for the subject development. The complex must ensure strong front door presence on East Main and clear primary building entrances for each phase in general. Based on the proposed internal parking area siting at the rear of future Phases 4A and 4B, and requirements for building entry near the public sidewalk edge, future plan submittals must provide clear entrances on the southern elevations or corners, and entrance areas with plaza connections to the street. Also refer to “Design the main entrance to be clearly identifiable”, page 39. The intention to develop emphasized entrance or plaza areas is stated in the applicant’s deviation narrative; however the SITE description for pedestrian accessibility or the Phase 4 description should clearly identify not just the requirement for plaza-to-sidewalk connection but also building entrance-to-plaza connection along East Main. For example, buildings 4A and 4B are well-situated to connect corner entrances from East Main Street with a common plaza and path from the sidewalk between them (per #4 on page 25). Both the deviation request and development design guidelines would benefit from inclusion of vertical green features and trellises as appropriate design options when describing landscape design near such entry areas. The master site plan’s proposed reduction in the required corridor setback is considered in the Deviation Review Criteria section below. The western and eastern elevations or roof forms of the buildings have solar access and future phase building design could include solar PV panels or future capacity for them to provide pedestrian interest and address the City’s solar orientation goals. 6. Outdoor Public Spaces (pg. 24) “Develop an outdoor public space as a focal point for the site.” “Connect an outdoor public space with major building activities.” “Design a public space to be actively used. Provide outdoor seating that is usable for extended periods during the year. Create a sense of enclosure when feasible.” The project complies upon fulfillment of high quality design provisions associated with the requested setback deviation in ensuing site plan applications. The complex’s southern frontage area provides an opportunity to develop an outdoor focal point for the site at the primary drive and pedestrian accesses to the site along East Main. As noted similarly in other sections, decorative surfacing, planters, seating, art, and pedestrian scaled lighting are all required in order to comply with these guidelines and to make the space a distinct place of interest. Per this requirement and page 16 of the Site Design objectives, outdoor use areas should be designed to facilitate their use throughout the year, such that extended or retractable awnings, transparent shelters and similar refuges or amenities may be appropriate. It is recommended to also consider how the design of the outdoor space may simultaneously serve to provide screening for ground- or wall-mounted equipment that may required adjacent to each building. “Define the sidewalk with landscaping, paving and pedestrian-scaled lighting.” The project does not comply with the guideline. No pedestrian scaled lighting is proposed. Pedestrian scaled lighting will significantly enhance the pedestrian experience and plaza designs. Incorporation of low-level, short pole (bollard) lights should be considered to create a feeling of pedestrian scale and safety, define plaza and pedestrian crossing areas, and reduce parking lot pole lighting where appropriate. Night lighting is important during winter hours for residential use. Such lighting may be proposed with future site plans. Also refer to Site Lighting, page 32. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 18 of 20 7. Internal Automobile Circulation Systems (page 29) “Identify a key entry point into a major site development with special landscape design elements.” While the need to maintain street vision clearance is recognized, it is unclear if the landscape plan proposes any distinct entrance-area elements. An attractive low-profile development sign with landscaping and lighting may contribute to this guideline. 8. Street level interest (page 41) “Develop the street level of a building to provide visual interest” The south elevations of the buildings proposed with future phases including 4A and 4B must be enhanced with detailed materials, extensive windows, awnings or similar weather protection, and outdoor seating in order to meet guidelines. Refer to associated comments on the treatment of front yard setback areas for future Phase 4. 9. Building Complex (page 47) “Buildings within a development should exhibit a unity of design.” “Coordinate design features among sets of buildings in a single development, including [but not exclusive to] similar rooflines, materials, window arrangements, sign location and details.” The proposed development design guidelines do not meet this standard. The applicant must review the enclosed COA and Deviation Request comments to add greater granularity to the provision of unified design elements, clearly specifying the selection of higher quality products/materials. Staff is prepared to coordinate with the applicant to incorporate these details and ensure that the development design guidelines serve as an effective tool for future site plan design and review. 10. Corridor Specific Design Guidelines: East Main Street Corridor (page 96) In general, the proposed project meets the overall goals for this corridor to serve as a transition from the character of the downtown core where buildings are positioned at the sidewalk edge, to properties further east that are set back from the street with a greensward. The requested deviation serves as a setback ‘steppe’ and complements the more transparent design of the future phase 4 office building façades, which will not be storefronts but still have many similar characteristics (e.g., awnings and significant level of fenestration). Contemporary and traditional building design is appropriately balanced. The proposed development is primarily commercial in nature, which is compatible with the generally commercial existing development pattern in the vicinity and with the automobile-oriented higher speed traffic at that section of East Main Street. At the same time, this section of East Main is a key extension of pedestrian facilities that have not yet been developed in full toward Frontage Road but which will be required with future development of those properties. Such facilities are critical as a connection to the opposite side of I-90 and for the regular pedestrian and event traffic associated with Lindley Park, just opposite of the subject property. The provision of street trees, which do not currently exist, will further invite use of multimodal activity to the area. The proposed signage plan states that a low-profile development or directory sign may be proposed which meets this corridor’s requirement for signs to be subordinate to the overall landscape character. The one corridor guideline that is not addressed by the subject proposal is whether a nearby transit stop (e.g., Streamline) and related improvements are anticipated. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 19 of 20 DEVIATION REVIEW CRITERIA To accomplish the intent and purpose of Section 38.17.080, Deviations from overlay or underlying zoning requirements, BMC, it may be necessary to deviate from the strict application of the overlay or underlying zoning requirements. Deviations from the underlying zoning requirements may be granted by the city after considering the recommendations of the design review board or administrative design review staff. The review authority shall make a determination that the deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards, and which will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this article, and with the adopted design objectives plan for the particular entryway corridor. Upon such a finding, the review authority may authorize deviations of up to 20 percent beyond or below minimum or maximum standards respectively, as established in the underlying zoning district regulations. If the review authority does not find that the proposed modified standards create an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards, and which will be consistent with the intent and purpose of this article, and with the adopted design objectives plan for the particular entryway corridor, no deviation shall be granted. One (1) deviation has been requested with the subject site plan application. The deviation requested is from Section 38.17.060, BMC, which requires parking and building setbacks of at least 25 feet from any Class 2 entryway corridor roadway right-of-way. Per Sec. 38.35.020, BMC, public noticing requirements included the request for deviation. The deviation is based upon the current East Main Street corridor design guidelines in the Design Objectives Plan that encourage parking to be site internal to the site, thus pushing buildings closer to the street and providing a transitional link to the storefront-scale setbacks of downtown. The proposed development’s parking layout does not provide parking capacity in excess of minimum requirements, such that open space is generally being used efficiently. Granting the maximum allowable 20 percent the setback allows the applicant to match the current setback pattern of development in the vicinity, while benefitting the overall development and entryway corridor aesthetic through the greater quality and depth of landscaping improvements proposed in exchange. The applicant’s deviation request narrative elaborates this justification in greater detail. Staff analysis and findings examining the deviation request for a 20 percent reduction from the required East Main setback of 25 feet, establishing it at 20 feet, determine the request to be acceptable. No other deviations, relaxations or zoning variances have been requested with this application. ADR Recommendation The deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality, and character superior to that produced by the existing standards. The proposed landscaping and building detail described previously in this report exceeds that which would be produced by minimum underlying code requirements. Specifically: a. Enhanced landscaping. The additional level of landscape detail, quality, and concentration in the setback area and overall site landscaping improvements offered through the deviation request and associated development design guidelines meets the intent of the setback to provide an attractive greensward and exceeds base code and COA performance requirements. Phase 4 development application review will assess the site landscape plan for implementation of human-scale vegetative and non-vegetative elements including but not exclusive to an accessible and defined patio or plaza, all-weather function, artwork, high-quality street furniture and landscape walls, and vertical trellises, terracing or planters that are recommended to include a DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 17040, 17041 Staff Report for East Main St. Master Plan and Phase 1 Site Plan Page 20 of 20 diversity of plant species with some year-round greenery. The master landscape plan does not presently included specifications for these provisions but the above COA review requires revision of the development design guidelines to ensure not only the presence but also quality of such elements. The enhanced landscape will serve to complement the public Lindley Park area across East Main Street, soften lines between the public right-of-way and developed private property, buffer residential neighborhood and commercial uses, and signal a transition zone for higher speed traffic coming from the east toward downtown. b. Character and quality. The proposed building architecture of the Phase 1 office building addresses human-scale details and community context via a combination of traditional and contemporary styles, durable material types, balconies, canopies and similar weather protection treatments, a diversity of muted colors and textures, and well-dimensioned forms. The recessed center module of the southern elevation supports active, landscaped outdoor space and relates to broader site landscaping in a manner that creates visual interest. This level of design quality and that of the associated Parkview and Mountain View buildings to the west are expected to set the tone for future phase building design, as will be reinforced through application of the development design guidelines. c. Engaging site environment. The proposed outdoor plaza space along East Main Street will welcome visitors to Bozeman as they enter the fringes of the downtown core area, as a visual gateway for vehicular traffic and feature of interest to foot traffic. In addition, the feature is a year-round opportunity for the development’s occupants to enjoy ‘outdoor room’ space, engage in social interactions. The plaza is visible from the public right of way and serves to identify that part of the site as the pedestrian entrance to the buildings. In summary, the development proposal as conditioned with all materials submitted and included with the application are found to be in general conformance with City standards. Administrative design review staff recommends conditional approval of the subject Site Plan with COA and Deviation. A1 Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 1. PROJECT Development Name: Description: 2. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 3. APPLICANT Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 4. REPRESENTATIVE Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 5. PROPERTY Full Street Address: Full Legal Description: Current Zoning: Current Use: Community Plan Designation: Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications Overlay District: Neighborhood Conservation Entryway Corridor None Urban Renewal District: Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast None 6. STATISTICS (ONLY APPLICATION TYPES 2-12, 17, 24 AND 26) Gross Area: Acres: Square Feet: Net Area: Acres: Square Feet: Dwelling Units: Nonresidential Gross Building Square Feet: 7. APPLICATION TYPES Check all that apply, use noted forms. Form Form 1. Pre-application Consultation None 17. Informal Review INF 2. Master Site Plan MSP 18. Zoning Deviation None 3. Site Plan SP 19. Zoning or Subdivision Variance Z/SVAR 4. Subdivision pre-application PA 20. Conditional Use Permit CUP 5. Subdivision preliminary plat PP 21. Special Temporary Use Permit STUP 6. Subdivision final plat FP 22. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP 7. Subdivision exemption SE 23. Regulated Activities in Wetlands RW 8. Condominium Review CR 24. Zone Map Amendment (non Annexation) ZMA 9. PUD concept plan PUDC 25. UDC Text Amendment ZTA 10. PUD preliminary plan PUDP 26. Growth Policy Amendment GPA 11. PUD final plan PUDFP 27. Modification/Plan Amendment MOD 12. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX 28. Extension of Approved Plan EXT 13. Administrative Interpretation Appeal AIA 29. Reasonable Accommodation RA 14. Administrative Project Decision Appeal APA 30. Other: 15. Commercial Nonresidential COA CCOA 1 6. Historic Neighborhood Conservation Overlay COA NCOA 8. APPLICATION FEES AND MATERIALS A. Fees are to be provided based upon the adopted fee schedule FS. Contact our office for an estimate. B. Application materials shall be submitted for each application as shown in the specific guidance and checklists that is provided for each application type. A common development review application form and common notice materials may be provided for an application that includes more than one application type. All other application materials shall be submitted for each individual application type per the project guidance and checklists. 9. CERTIFICATIONS AND SIGNATURES This application must be signed by both the applicant(s) and the property owner(s) (if different) for all application types before the submittal will be accepted. The only exception to this is an informal review application that may be signed by the applicant(s) only. As indicated by the signature(s) below, the applicant(s) and property owner(s) submit this application for review under the terms and provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code. It is further indicated that any work undertaken to complete a development approved by the City of Bozeman shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and any special conditions established by the approval authority. I acknowledge that the City has an Impact Fee Program and impact fees may be assessed for my project. Further, I agree to grant City personnel and other review agency representative's access to the subject site during the course of the review process (Section 38.34.050, BMC). I (We) hereby certify that the above information is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Certification of Completion and Compliance -I understand that conditions of approval may be applied to the application and that I will comply with any conditions of approval or make necessary corrections to the application materials in order to comply with municipal code provisions. Statement of Intent to Construct According to the Final Plan -I acknowledge that construction not in compliance with the approved final plan may result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct noncompliance. Signature: ---= ___ ,., Appli"nt ~ ~ Printed Name: ~ D ~rger Owner Signature: Printed Name: Owner Signature Printed Nam If signing as a....,...._._ ti on, p ase provide the title and position of the individual signing on behalf of the corporation. ~~~!l'l.e sheets for additional owner signatures. Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 Development Review Application Al CONTACT US phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net Page 3 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications CCOA Commercial COA Required Materials CCOA Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1 (if deviation) Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications COMMERCIAL/NONRESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS One set is required that includes 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets. If a deviation is proposed and if more than two deviations or deviations of more than 20% are proposed additional sets will be required. Complete and signed development review application form A1 One Plan set that includes all commercial certificate of appropriateness checklist items below unless otherwise provided in another application type Standard application sets required plan sizes: Plans may be 24 x 36 inch or 11 x 17 inch or 8 1/2 x 11 inch in size depending on project type. Larger, more complex projects require larger plans. 1 digital version of all materials (JPEG or PDF) on separate CD-ROM or USB drive. Individual files must be provided at 5MB or less in size. Files shall be named according to naming protocol. Notes: All plans must be drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8½ x 11 inches or larger than 24 x 36 inches. The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used, they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Plans that are rolled or not bound into sets will not be accepted. NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1and materials if deviation proposed associated with an existing building in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. APPLICATION FEE Base fee $344 If deviation add: $221 per deviation Application types and fees are cumulative. HISTORIC PROPERTY INFORMATION IF IN NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY Date of construction if known: Existing property record form Updated property record form For assistance, see more information through the following link: http://www.bozeman.net/Departments/Community-Development/Historic-Preservation/How-To-s- FAQ-s COMMERCIAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS CHECKLIST Certain information shall be provided for review prior to a decision on a certificate of appropriateness. The extent of documentation to be submitted on any project shall be dictated by the scope of the planned alteration and the information reasonably necessary for the City to make its determination on the application. Commercial COA Required Materials CCOA Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1 (if deviation) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: 1. Project narrative providing a thorough description of what is being proposed including a list of all alterations/changes proposed on the property. 2. If in Neighborhood Conservation Overlay, historical information, such as pictures, plans, authenticated verbal records and similar research documentation that may be relevant to the proposed changes to the property 3. One current picture of each elevation of each structure planned to be altered that will clearly express the nature and extend of the changes planned. Except where otherwise recommended, no more than eight pictures should be submitted. All pictures shall be printed on or attached to 81/2 x 11 paper with the property address, elevation direction (N, S, E, W) and relevant information on the proposed changes 4. Sketch plan or Site plan depending on project complexity with north arrow showing property dimensions, location of buildings, parking, driveways, fencing, landscaping, yard/setback locations, location of utilities, access, pedestrian facilities, and location of changes proposed. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. Depending on complexity and extent of changes proposed changes to the site plan shall be clearly depicted on the site plan showing existing conditions or two separate site plans titled existing and proposed 5. Front, rear and side elevations of all buildings, structures, fences and walls with height dimensions and roof pitches if new construction or changes to elevations are proposed. Show existing and proposed changes. Show open stairways and other projections from exterior building walls 6. Building elevations shall include proposed exterior building materials, windows and doors including a color and building material palette for all proposed features keyed to the building elevations 7. One exhibit or illustration shall include all the internal and external elements of a structure to be removed or altered by a project. All elements to be removed or altered, and to what extent, shall be clearly identified and shall include those elements to be removed and reinstalled. 8. For any non-conforming structure, an analysis of demolition to determine whether the threshold for loss of protected non-conforming status per Section 38.32.040.B BMC has been met or surpassed. 9. For minor fence, screen, storefront or window/door changes or replacements, and other minor changes: pictures ,specifications and other information that will clearly express the proposed changes or alterations to the property 10. Cutsheets or brochure pages for proposed windows, doors, exterior lighting or other detailed alterations if building elevations are not detailed enough to depict features accurately 11. Floor plans showing floor layout including square footage and proposed use for each room and area within the building clearly showing areas to be changed or added to. Suggested scale of ¼ to 1 foot. 12. Parking plan and calculation for all uses, if proposed changes to the property require review of parking requirements (e.g. addition of bedrooms to a home, Accessory Dwelling Units, new infill residential construction). 13. A schedule for the proposed changes to the property if to be phased or if applicable. DEVIATIONS If the proposal includes a request for a deviation in the Entryway Corridor Overlay as outlined in Section 38.17.070 BMC the application shall be processed as a site plan application with deviation and this form shall not apply, reference instead forms SP and SP1. 14. If the proposal includes a request for a dev iation in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay as outlined in Section 38.16.070 BMC and is being processed independent of a site plan application then this application shall be accompanied by written and graphic material sufficient to illustrate the conditions that the modified standards will produce. 15. Either through the site plan requirement above or separate exhibit clearly showing any proposed deviations related to site requirements such as yards/setbacks, lot coverage, or other applicable standards. 16. Either through the building elevation requirement above or separate exhibit clearly show any proposed deviations related to building construction such as height, second story additions, or other applicable standards. Commercial COA Required Materials CCOA Page 3 of 3 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1 (if deviation) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: 17. A deviation narrative shall be added to the project narrative stating which Section (s) of the Bozeman Municipal Code are proposed for deviation, to what extent and include a response to the following: a. How the modification is more historically appropriate for the building and site in question and the adjacent properties, as determined in Section 38.16.050 BMC than would be achieved under a literal enforcement of this chapter (Chapter 38, BMC); b. How the modifications will have minimal adverse effect on abutting propertie s or the permitted uses thereof; and c. How the modifications will assure the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. d. How the requested deviation will encourage restoration and rehabilitation activity that will contribute to the overall historic character of the community. If more than one deviation, a response to the criteria shall be provided for each deviation CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net DEM Demolition Checklist DEM Page 1 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, NCOA or CCOA Recommended Forms: Required Forms: DEMOLITION CHECKLIST GENERAL INFORMATION This checklist outlines the materials required for the review of building demolition in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District and the Entryway Corridor Overlay District. This checklist is required as part of a related Certificate of Appropriateness application, either form NCOA or CCOA. In the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District, a complete application submittal for the subseque nt development after the demolition or movement has occurred must accompany any request for demolition. The subsequent development would require either form NCOA if residential or CCOA if commercial. The subsequent development must be approved before a demolition or moving permit may be issued. For assistance, see more information through the following link: http://www.bozeman.net/Departments/Community-Development/Historic-Preservation/How-To-s- FAQ-s NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DEMOLITION CHECKLIST Certain information shall be provided for review prior to a decision on a certificate of appropriateness that includes the proposed demolition of a principal/ primary building. The extent of documentation to be submitted on any project shall be dictated by the scope of the demolition and the information reasonably necessary for the City to make its determination on the application. 1. Project narrative providing a thorough description of what is being proposed including a list of all alterations proposed to buildings, structures and site layouts on the property. 2. Historical information, such as pictures, plans, authenticated verbal records and similar research documentation which describe the property’s historic significance that may be releva nt to the proposed changes to the property. A current Montana Property Record Form may be used to document the existing conditions on the site and determine the property’s historic significance. 3. One current picture of each elevation of each structure to be demolished. Except where otherwise recommended, no more than eight pictures should be submitted. All pictures shall be printed on or attached to 81/2 x 11 paper with the property address, elevation direction (N, S, E, W). 4. Sketch plan or Site plan depending on project complexity with north arrow showing property dimensions, location of buildings, parking, driveways, fencing, landscaping, yard/setback locations, location of utilities, access, pedestrian facilities, and location of changes proposed. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. Depending on complexity and extent of changes proposed, changes to the site plan shall be clearly depicted on the site plan showing existing conditions or two separate site plans titled existing and proposed. 5. One exhibit or illustration shall include all the internal and external elements of a structure to be removed or altered by a project. All elements to be removed or altered, and to what extent, shall be clearly identified and shall include those elements to be removed and reinstalled. 6. For any non-conforming structure, an analysis of demolition to determine whether the threshold for loss of protected non-conforming status per Section 38.32.040.B BMC has been met or surpassed. 7. If the property is classified as historic, whether by listing on the National Register of Historic Places, identification as “eligible” or “contributing,” identification as a Landmark or in a local district, the application shall provide definitive evidence in support of demolishing the structure under Sec. 38.16.080.A.3 b 1&2, including: a. The structure or site is a threat to public health or safety, and that no reasonable repairs or alterations will remove such threat; any costs associated with the removal of health or safety threats must exceed the value of the structure. Demolition Checklist DEM Page 2 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, NCOA or CCOA Recommended Forms: Required Forms: b. The structure or site has no viable economic or useful life remaining, based on evidence supplied by the applicant. This may include a structural analysis and cost comparison evaluating the cost to repair and/ or rehabilitate versus the cost of demolition and redevelopment using the International Existing Buildings Code. ENTRYWAY CORRIDOR OVERLAY DEMOLITION CHECKLIST 1. Project narrative providing a thorough description of what is being proposed including a list of all alterations proposed on the property. 2. One current picture of each elevation of each structure to be demolished. Except where otherwise recommended, no more than eight pictures should be submitted. All pictures shall be printed on or attached to 81/2 x 11 paper with the property address, elevation direction (N, S, E, W). 3. Sketch plan or Site plan depending on project complexity with north arrow showing property dimensions, location of buildings, parking, driveways, fencing, landscaping, yard/setback locations, location of utilities, access, pedestrian facilities, and location of changes proposed. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. Depending on complexity and extent of changes proposed changes to the site plan shall be clearly depicted on the site plan showing existing conditions or two separate site plans titled existing and proposed. Building (s) and signage to be demolished shall be clearly depicted. 4. Proposed treatment of the site following demolition (e.g. grade flat, seed, temporary irrigation,etc.) 5. Proposed access control to the site for all existing accesses to the street. Proposed method of barrier. 6. Weed control and maintenance plan for the site. 7. Nonconforming signage shall be removed from the site during demolition. If nonconforming signage is on site, provide a detail of the existing location and confirm that signage will be removed during demolition. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net Project Narrative     Page | 1     | BOZEMAN COMMONS | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana NARRATIVE Project Scope: We are proposing the demolition of (5) existing residences located on the east portion of the site for Bozeman Commons Development. With demolition of the structures, we will also be removing all infrastructure for these existing buildings including, foundations, roads, water, sewer, power, gas and communication utilities underground and overhead within the development site boundaries that service these structures. Bozeman Commons Master Development is a proposed multi-phased commercial office and future mixed-use building site complex. The site consists of 4.29 acres including (Block 28, Lot 2C, Plat C-23- A21); (50’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 10&11, north 42' of Lots 22-23); (101’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 6-9, north 42’ of Lots 24-27 & adjacent street & alley); (25’x100’ tract consisting of north portion of Lot 12). It is planned to have a total of 5 buildings on the site. Entitlement period of 5 years requested. Bozeman Commons - Phase 1 consists of a new 17,000 sf 2-story office building. It includes new on- site parking, which will be integrated with the existing parking lot to the west. Entry and exit to the site for this phase will use both existing accesses from E. Main Street (access to parking lot for 1007 & 1019 buildings and access to residences for demolition). Both the Master plan & Phase 1 are currently in the approval process. Intent: We are requesting approval to remove these buildings prior to completion of Phase 1 construction. Anticipated completion of Phase 1 is 2018. The removal of these residences will free up their existing sanitary sewer capacity to be used for the new Phase 1 office building. Approved capacity calculations are included with this submittal for reference. Proposed residences for demolition: 1107 E. Main Street Unit A is 5 bedrooms, 1 ½ bath (Main Level = 1048 sf, Basement = 1048, Half story = 786). Unit B is 2 bedrooms, 3/4 bath with small garage (Main Level = 675 sf). Unit C is 2 bedrooms, 3/4 bath with small garage (Main Level = 675 sf). Unit D is 3 bedrooms, 3/4 bath, no garage (Main Level = 1150 sf). Unit E is 3 bedrooms, 3/4 bath, no garage (Main Level = 1150 sf). 2,2570.1 This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. 1,8781: Feet 00 Legend 0 Notes GIS Department www.bozeman.net City of Bozeman Location 0 City of Bozeman City Limits Parcels Roads EXISTING UTILITESEXISTING UTILITES a   1107 East Main Page 1     October 3, 2016 Shawn Kohtz, PE City of Bozeman Engineering Department RE: 1107 East Main Sewer Capacity Shawn, Laura Dornberger with Locati Architects and Mark Esponda with Dick Anderson Construction have asked us to review the documentation and requirements for the existing waste water system at 1107 East Main, Bozeman, MT. It is our understanding that the property is to be developed, but that the existing sewer service currently does not have the capacity for the new development in addition to the existing structures on site. It is our understanding that the existing structures are to be removed prior to occupancy of the new building and that the existing sewer service is scheduled for upgrade at some point in the future. The goal for the present is to determine if the peak hour sewer flow of the removed structures is less than the anticipated peak hour flow of the proposed new structure. Per previous documentation, the new office building was shown to have 22 Water Supply Fixture Units and the existing buildings being removed have 64 Water Supply Fixture Units (WSFU). In addition, the Drainage Fixture Units (DFU) were calculated for the new proposed building and the existing buildings being removed (based on UPC 2012, chapter 7). Proposed New Building: 23 DFU’s Removed Buildings: 54 DFU’s In addition, for an estimated peak hour flow in gallons per minute, the following is used: New Office Building: 70 Occupants Water Use: 1.6 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (low flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 2.1 gallons per hour per person Estimated New Peak Total: 70 people x 2.1 gallons/hour = 147 gallons per hour. Existing Residential Buildings: 5 Buildings 2 Persons per Building 10 People total Water Use: Shower: 2.5gpm x 10 minutes = 25 gallons per shower per person per hr 3.5 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (old high flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 29 gallons per hour per person   1107 East Main Page 2   Estimated Existing Peak Total: 10 people x 29 gallons = 290 gallons per hour. (note: this number could be higher if clothes washing and dishwashing happen simultaneously with showering and toileting). (note: these numbers assume the old toilets are 3.5 gallons per flush and the new toilets meet current code standards of 1.6 gallons per flush. If the existing toilets have not been replaced in the last 10-15 years, this is likely accurate. If the toilets have not been replaced in 20-30 years, the existing toilets could have flow rates as high as 6 gallons per flush.) Therefore, based on the above information for the three different calculation methods - maximum WSFU, DFU and estimated peak flow - the new building sewer flow will not exceed the existing building sewer flow. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information or clarification. Sincerely, Curtis L. Smit, PE Consulting Design Solutions, Inc. Copy: file Larua Dornberger, Locati Architects Mark Esponda, Dick Anderson Construction | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana   Parking (B-2) Floor Area = 85% x gross SF (or use Sec. 38.25.010 1a to calculate) Office Parking Required: (1 space per 250 SF) Proposed Building 1  Floor Area: 17,147 SF x 85% = 14,575 SF  Parking Required: 14,575 / 250 = 58 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 58 spaces required  Provided 61 spaces provided  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d) Future Building 2 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 5,000 SF x 85% = 4,250 SF  Parking (office): 4,250 / 250 = 17 spaces  Parking (Res.) 15,000 SF (10 Beds) = 10 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 10 x 50% = 5 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 22 spaces required  Provided 64 spaces + 5 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 80  Subtotal Provided 130 Future Building 3 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 4,000 SF x 85% = 3,400 SF  Parking (office): 3,400 / 250 = 14 spaces  Parking (Res.) 12,000 SF (12 Beds) = 12 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 12 x 50% = 6 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 20 spaces required  Provided 29 spaces + 6 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 100  Subtotal Provided 165 Future Building 4A  Floor Area: 16,000 SF x 85% = 13,600 SF  Parking Required: 13,600 / 250 = 55 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 55 spaces required  Provided see 4B  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provide (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 155  Subtotal Provided see 4B Page | 2 Future Building 4B  Floor Area: 18,800 SF x 85% = 15,900 SF  Parking Required: 15,900 / 250 = 64 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 64 spaces required  Provided 54 spaces provided  Bike 7 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 219  Subtotal Provided 219 ______________________________________________________________________ TOTAL PARKING 219 spaces (Includes accessible spaces) Setbacks Setbacks for Buildings: a. Front yard: seven feet, except along arterials where minimum is 25 feet. b. Rear yard: ten feet. c. Side yards: five feet (except zero lot lines as allowed by section 38.21.060). Setbacks for Parking and loading areas: a. Front yard: 25 feet. b. Rear yard; ten feet. 1 c. Side yards: eight feet. 1 1 Side and rear yards for parking may be allowed to be zero feet when coordinated parking arrangements between adjacent properties is provided. Building Height a. Roof pitch less than 3:12: 38 feet. b. Roof pitch 3:12 or greater: 44 feet. d. Maximum height otherwise cumulatively allowed by this section may be increased by 30 percent through the approval of a conditional use permit, but only when the additional height is a specifically identified purpose of the review.   C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana TABLE OF CONTENTS Master Site Plan & Site Plan Phase 1 Application & Narrative 1. A1 2. MSP or SP 3. SP1 4. N1 5. N1 Address List 6. COB development review comments MSP or SP with applicant responses to each item Supporting Documents 7. Project Narrative – MSP or SP 8. Building Setback Deviation Narrative – MSP only 9. Building Setback Deviation Drawing – MSP only 10. Concurrent Construction Request – SP only 11. Sewer Capacity 12. Parking Calculations 13. Open space & Parkland Calculations 14. Signage Calculations & Comp Sign Plan 15. Storm Water Design Report, (Including Drywells) 16. Traffic Impact Study 17. Traffic Impact Study Addendum 18. Hydrant Pressure & Flow Test 19. CIL of Water Rights Calc & DNRC Letter 20. Access Easement & Zero Lot Agreement – signed 21. Easement for Access at Carwash – signed 22. Restriction of Transfer – MSP only 23. Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of SID o Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard o Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane Site Drawings 30. T1 Topographic Map 31. T1a Existing Utilities 32. C1.0 Civil Master Site Plan, Grading, Drainage & Utility 33. C1.1 Civil Phase 1 Site Plan Improvements – SP only 34. C2.0 Civil Grading & Drainage Plan 35. C3.0 Civil Detail Sheet 36. C4.0 Stormwater Details 37. L1.0 Landscape Plan 38. AC1.0 Architectural Master Site Plan 39. AC1.1 Phase 1 Site Plan 40. AC1.2 Construction Plan 41. Pole Light Photometrics 42. A1.0 Site Details (Bike Rack, Refuse, Benches & Planter) 43. A2.0 Main Level Plan 44. A2.1 Second Level Plan 45. Color Elevations 46. A3.0 Elevations 47. A3.1 Elevations 48. Roof Screen 49. Material Board 50. Lighting Cut Sheets 51. Retaining Wall Detail – MSP only A1 Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 1. PROJECT Development Name: Description: 2. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 3. APPLICANT Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 4. REPRESENTATIVE Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 5. PROPERTY Full Street Address: Full Legal Description: Current Zoning: Current Use: Community Plan Designation: NORTHERN PACIFIC ADD, S07, T02 S, R06 E, - BLOCK 28, Lot 2C, PLAT C-23-A21, - Lot 10&11 - PLUS, N42' LOTS 22-23 50X260 PLUS ADJ STREETS & ALLEYS 101X260' - TRACT 25'X100' East Main Development Commercially develop existing vacant lot located along E Main St JBL LLC 1007 E Main St, Ste 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 406-587-1139 jl@locati.co Locati Architects - Laura Dornberger 1007 E Main St, Ste 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 406-587-1139 ldornberger@locatiarchitects.com Same As Applicant 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 See above B-2 Vacant + 5 residential units Community Commercial Mixed Use Bozeman Commons 1105 E Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 (Phase 1) Existing Lots associated with Dev. 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street, Bozeman MT 59715 Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications Overlay District: Neighborhood Conservation Entryway Corridor None Urban Renewal District: Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast None 6. STATISTICS (ONLY APPLICATION TYPES 2-12, 17, 24 AND 26) Gross Area: Acres: Square Feet: Net Area: Acres: Square Feet: Dwelling Units: Nonresidential Gross Building Square Feet: 7. APPLICATION TYPES Check all that apply, use noted forms. Form Form 1. Pre-application Consultation None 17. Informal Review INF 2. Master Site Plan MSP 18. Zoning Deviation None 3. Site Plan SP 19. Zoning or Subdivision Variance Z/SVAR 4. Subdivision pre-application PA 20. Conditional Use Permit CUP 5. Subdivision preliminary plat PP 21. Special Temporary Use Permit STUP 6. Subdivision final plat FP 22. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP 7. Subdivision exemption SE 23. Regulated Activities in Wetlands RW 8. Condominium Review CR 24. Zone Map Amendment (non Annexation) ZMA 9. PUD concept plan PUDC 25. UDC Text Amendment ZTA 10. PUD preliminary plan PUDP 26. Growth Policy Amendment GPA 11. PUD final plan PUDFP 27. Modification/Plan Amendment MOD 12. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX 28. Extension of Approved Plan EXT 13. Administrative Interpretation Appeal AIA 29. Reasonable Accommodation RA 14. Administrative Project Decision Appeal APA 30. Other: 15. Commercial Nonresidential COA CCOA 1 6. Historic Neighborhood Conservation Overlay COA NCOA 8. APPLICATION FEES AND MATERIALS A. Fees are to be provided based upon the adopted fee schedule FS. Contact our office for an estimate. 5 to be demolished 17,147 sf phase 1 4.29 186,855 4.29 186,855 MSP Master Site Plan Required Materials MSP Page 1 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1, SP1, SP (if concurrent first phase proposed) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: MASTER SITE PLAN REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS 3 total sets are required that include 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets. If more than two deviations are proposed the application shall be processed as a Planned Unit Development, use instead forms for a PUD. Complete and signed development review application form A1. Plan sets that include all required items listed on the site plan checklist form SP1. Plan sets that include all the required items listed in the master plan checklist below. If the project exceeds Design Review Board thresholds and the project is within an Overlay District, 8 additional sets that include 11 x 17 inch plans are required. Standard application sets required plan sizes: 2 sets that include full size 24 x 36 inch plans 1 set that include 11 x 17 inch plans 2-digital versions of all materials (JPEG or PDF) on separate CD-ROM’s or USB drives. Individual files must be provided at 5MB or less in size. Files shall be named according to naming protocol. Notes: All plans must be drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8½ x 11 inches or larger than 24 x 36 inches. The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used, they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Plans that are rolled or not bound into sets will not be accepted. NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1 and materials APPLICATION FEE Base fee $1,785 If deviation add: $215 per deviation Application types and fees are cumulative. MASTER SITE PLAN CHECKLIST A master site plan is a generalized development plan that establishes building envelopes and overall entitlements for complex, large-scale projects that will require multiple years to reach completion. Use of a master site plan is not required unless necessary to address phasing of a proposed development, see section 38.19.090.B.3 BMC, or if required as part of the residential emphasis mixed-use district or North 19th Avenue/West Oak Street entryway corridors. A master site plan involves one or more of the following: a. One hundred or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or structures; b. Fifty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space, service commercial space or industrial space; c. Multiple buildings located on multiple contiguous lots and/or contiguous city blocks; d. Multiple owners; e. Development phasing projected to extend beyond two years; or f. Parking for more than 200 vehicles. 1. Provide proposed entitlement period: minimum 3 years, maximum five years. Master Site Plan Required Materials MSP Page 2 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1, SP1, SP (if concurrent first phase proposed) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: 2. Provide detailed phasing information including: a. Proposed phase lines. b. Proposed limit of construction for each phase. c. Proposed plan for staging and phasing of construction including storage of topsoil, spoils and construction materials and equipment. d. Any infrastructure or site plan elements proposed for financial guarantee. e. Phasing contingencies if phasing does not proceed in the original order proposed. 3. Draft design guidelines to direct design of the development over the entitlement period. 4. Statement that following approval of a master site plan, the applicant shall submit to the department, sequential individual site plan for specific areas within the master site plan. Each subsequent application for a site plan shall be consistent with the approved master site plan and subject to the review criteria of Section 38.19.100.A BMC. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net SP1 Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 1 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SITE PLAN CHECKLIST DESIGN REVIEW BOARD THRESHOLDS Must be A plus one or more of B-F in order to require Board review. Yes No A. Project location is within an Overlay District? B. 20 or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or structures? C. 30,000 or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space, service commercial space or industrial space? D. 20,000 or more square feet of exterior storage of materials or goods? E. Parking for more than 90 vehicles? F. Large scale retail per Section 38.22.180 BMC? GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name of project/development. 2. Name and mailing address of developer and owner. 3. Name and mailing address of engineer, architect, landscape architect, planner, etc. 4. Location of project/development by street address/legal description. 5. Location/vicinity map, including area within one-half mile of the site. 6. A construction route map showing how materials and heavy equipment will travel to and from the site. SITE PLAN GENERAL 7. Boundary line of property with dimensions. 8. Date of plan preparation and changes. 9. North point indicator. 10. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. 11. Parcel size(s) in gross acres and square feet. 12. Estimated total floor area and estimated ratio of floor area to lot size (floor area ratio, FAR), with a breakdown by land use. 13. Location, percentage of parcel(s) and total site, and square footage of the following: a. Existing and proposed buildings and structures. b. Driveway circulation and parking areas. c. Landscaped areas. d. Private open space, provide boundary/ies and dimensions (if residential requirement). e. City Parks. f. Other public lands (school sites, public access greenway corridors, trail corridors). 14. Total number, type and density per type of dwelling units, and total new and gross residential density and density per residential parcel. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 2 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SITE PLAN DETAILS The location, identification and dimensions of the following existing and proposed data, onsite and to a distance of 100 feet (200 feet for PUD’s) outside the site boundary, exclusive of public rights -of-way unless otherwise stated. 15. Topographic contours at a minimum interval of 2 feet, or as determined by the Director. 16. Location of City limit boundaries, and boundaries of Gallatin County’s Bozeman Area Zoning Jurisdiction, within or near the development. 17. Existing zoning within 200 feet of the site. 18. Adjacent streets and street rights-of-way to a distance of 150 feet, except for sites adjacent to major arterial streets where the distances shall be 200 feet. 19. On site streets and rights of way. 20. Ingress and egress points. 21. Traffic flow on site. 22. Traffic flow off site. 23. All parking facilities, including circulation aisles, access drives, covered and uncovered bicycle parking, compact spaces, ADA accessible spaces and motorcycle parking, on -street parking, number of employee and non-employee parking spaces, existing and proposed, and total square footage of each. 24. Utilities and utility rights of way and easements, including: a. Electric. b. Natural gas. c. Telephone, cable and similar utilities. d. Water. e. Sewer (sanitary, treated effluent and storm). 25. Surface water, including: a. Ponds, streams and irrigation ditches (include classifications be based upon a determination of the Gallatin Conservation District; note classification of each feature on plans). b Watercourses, water bodies and wetlands (include classifications based upon a determination of the Gallatin Conservation District, Army Corps of Engineers, or Wetland Delineation Report; note classification of each feature on plans). c. Floodplains as designated on the Federal Insurance Rate Map or that may otherwise be identified as lying within a 100 year floodplain through additional floodplain delineation, engineering analysis, topographic survey or other objective and factual basis. d. A floodplain analysis report in compliance with Article. 26. Grading and drainage plan, including provisions for on-site retention/detention and water quality improvement facilities as required by the Engineering Department, or in compliance with B.M.C. Section 14 storm drainage ordinance and best management pr actices manual adopted by the City. 27. All drainageways, streets, arroyos, dry gullies, diversion ditches, spillways, reservoirs, etc. which may be incorporated into the storm drainage system for the property shall be designated: a. The name of the drainageway (where appropriate). b. The downstream conditions (developed available drainageways, etc.). c. Any downstream restrictions. 28. Significant rock outcroppings, slopes of greater than 15 percent or other significant topographic features. 29. Sidewalks, walkways, driveways, loading areas and docks, bikeways, including typical details and interrelationships with vehicular circulation system, indicating proposed treatment of points of Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 3 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: conflict. 30. Provision for handicapped accessibility, including but not limited to, wheelchair ramps, parking spaces, handrails and curb cuts, including construction details and the applicant’s certification of ADA compliance. 31. Fences and walls, including typical details. 32. Permanent and construction period exterior refuse collection areas, including typical details. 33. Curb, asphalt section and drive approach construction details. 34. Location and extent of snow storage areas. 35. Location and extent of street vision triangles. 36. Unique natural features, significant wildlife areas and vegetative cover, including existing trees and shrubs having a diameter greater than 2.5 inches, by species. 37. Historic, cultural and archeological resources, describe and map any designated historic structures or districts, and archeological or cultural sites. 38. Major public facilities, including schools, parks, trails, etc. PARKLAND AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING 39. If residential, provide the required parkland for the development, including calculations per Chapter 38, Article 27 BMC (Park and Recreation Requirements). Source and amount of parkland credit to be used if previously provided. If parkland is proposed a park plan shall be submitted consistent with Section 38.41.060.A.16 BMC. 40. Describe how the site plan will satisfy any requirements of Section 17.02, BMC (Affordable Housing) which have either been established for that lot(s) through the subdivision process or if no subdivision has previously occurred are applicable to a site plan. The description shall be of adequate detail to clearly identify those lots and dwellings designated as subject to Title 17, Chapter 2, BMC compliance requirements and to make the obligations placed on the affected lots and dwellings readily understandable. LIGHTING DETAILS 41. Lighting plan and electrical site plan, complete with all structures, parking spaces, building entrances, traffic areas (both vehicular and pedestrian), vegetation that might interfere with lighting, and adjacent uses, containing a layout of all proposed fixtures by location and type. 42. A photometric lighting plan that contains a layout of all proposed fixtures by location and type and extends the photometric information to the property boundaries and rights of way. For fueling canopies a second photometric plan is required to specifically analyze the light output underneath the drip line of the fuel canopy. 43. Cut sheets for all proposed exterior fixtures that are keyed to the fixtures noted in the lighting electrical plan and the photometric lighting plan. BUILDING DESIGN AND SIGNAGE 44. Front, rear and side elevations of all buildings, structures, fences and walls with height dimensions and roof pitches. Show open stairways and other projections from exterior building wall. Building elevations shall include proposed exterior building materials, windows and doors including a color and material palette for all proposed features keyed to the building elevations. 45. Provide elevations and details of all ground mounted and rooftop mechanical screening. 46. Exterior signs if applicable. Include building frontage dimension(s) and maximum sign area calculation, provide sign dimensions and square footage of each. Note – The review of signs in conjunction with this application is only review for sign area compliance with Chapter 38, Article 28 BMC (Signs). A sign permit must be obtained from the Building Division prior to erection of any and all signs, addition design guidelines apply for signs within zoning Overlay Districts. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 4 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: LANDSCAPE PLAN A separate landscape plan shall be submitted as part of the site plan application unless the required landscape information can be included in a clear and uncluttered manner on a site plan with a scale where one inch equals 20 feet. 47. Project name, street address, and lot and block description. 48. Date, scale, north arrow, and the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of both the property owner and the person preparing the plan. Plan preparer shall be a state registered landscape architect; an individual with a degree in landscape design and two years of professional design experience in the state; or an individual with a degree in a related field (horticulture, botany, plant science, etc.) and at least five years of professional landscape design experience, of which two years have been in the state. 49. Location of existing boundary lines and dimensions of the lot. 50. Existing and proposed grade that complies with maximum allowable slope and grade. 51. Approximate centerlines of existing watercourses, required watercourse setbacks, and the location of any 100-year floodplain; the approximate location of significant drainage features; and the location and size of existing and proposed streets and alleys, utility easements, utility lines, driveways and sidewalks on the lot and/or adjacent to the lot. 52. Location of all pavement, curbs, sidewalks and gutters. 53. Show location of existing and/or proposed drainage facilities which are to be used for drainage control including proposed landscaping and seeding as required by Section 38.23.080.H BMC 54. Location and extent of snow storage areas. 55. Location and extent of street vision triangles. 56. Complete landscape legend providing a description of plant materials shown on the plan, including typical symbols, names (common and botanical name), locations, quantities, container or caliper sizes at installation, heights, spread and spacing and identification of drought tolerant and/or native and adapted species. The location and type of all existing trees on the lot over 6 inches in caliper must be specifically indicated. 57. Size of planting at the time of installation and at maturity. 58. Complete illustration of landscaping and screening to be provided in or near off-street parking and loading areas, including information as to the amount (in square feet) of landscape area to be provided internal to parking areas and the number and location of required off -street parking and loading spaces. 59. Street frontage landscaping. 60. Locations and dimensions of proposed landscape buffer strips, including watercourse buffer zones demonstrating compliance with watercourse setback planting plan requirements per Section 38.23.100 BMC unless previously provided during subdivision review. 61. Location, height and material of proposed landscape screening and fencing (with berms to be delineated by one foot contours). 62. An indication of how existing healthy trees (if any) are to be retained and protected from damage during construction. 63. Size, height, location and material of proposed seating, lighting, planters, sculptures, and water features. 64. A description of proposed watering methods including any use of high efficiency irrigation technologies and best practice, source of irrigation water and estimated amount of water consumption broken down by vegetation type (e.g. turf, shrubs, trees) and total estimated water consumption. 65. Areas to be irrigated and type of proposed irrigation and the irrigation system design plan. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 5 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: 66. Tabulation of performance points earned by the plan per Section 38.26.060 BMC. STREETS AND TRAFFIC 67. Street, traffic, and access information required in Section 38.41.060.A.12 unless previously provided through a subdivision review process or that the requirement is waived in writing by the Engineering Department prior to application submittal. OTHER PERMITS 68. Stormwater management permit and fee to Engineering Department. DEVIATIONS If the proposal includes a request for a deviation as outlined in Section 38.35.050 BMC the application shall be accompanied by written and graphic material sufficient to illustrate the conditions that the modified standards will produce. 69. Either through the site plan requirement above or separate exhibit clearly show any proposed deviations related to site requirements such as yards/setbacks, lot coverage, parking or other applicable standards. 70. Either through the building elevation requirement above or separate exhibit clearly show any proposed deviations related to building construction such as height, second story additions, or other applicable standards. 71. For deviations in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay a deviation narrative shall be provided stating which Section (s) of the Bozeman Municipal Code are proposed for deviation, to what extent and include a response to the following: a. How the modification is more historically appropriate for the building and site in question and the adjacent properties, as determined in Section 38.16.050 BMC than would be achieved under a literal enforcement of this chapter (Chapter 38, BMC); b. How the modifications will have minimal adverse effect on abutting properties or the per mitted uses thereof; and c. How the modifications will assure the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. d. How the requested deviation will encourage restoration and rehabilitation activity that will contribute to the overall historic character of the community. If more than one deviation a response to the criteria shall be provided for each deviation. 72. For deviations in the Entryway Corridor Overlay a deviation narrative shall be provided stating which Section (s) of the Bozeman Municipal Code are proposed for deviation, to what extent and include a response to the following: a. How the deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards; b. How the deviation will be consistent with the intent and purpose of the article (Article 17, Chapter 38 BMC);and c. How the deviation will be consistent with the adopted design objectives (City of Bozeman Design Objectives Plan, 2005) for the particular entryway corridor If more than one deviation, a response to the criteria shall be provided for each deviation. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net N1 Noticing Materials Page 1 of 1 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: N1 Recommended Forms: Required Forms: NOTICING MATERIALS Notice is required for certain projects in order for citizens to participate in decision making which affects their interests and provides opportunity to receive information pertinent to an application that would not otherwise be available to the decision maker. SITE PLAN, MASTER SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE, DEVIATION, FIRST MINOR SUBDIVISON AND SIMILAR REQUIRED NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site, attached to this checklist. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the adjoining property owners. MAJOR AND SUBSEQUENT MINOR SUBDIVISION REQUIRED NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site and not physically contiguous (touching a boundary) to the subdivision, attached to this checklist. Clearly label list ADJOINER NOT CONTIGUOUS. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the adjoining property owners. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners physically contiguous (touching a boundary) including recorded purchasers under contract for deed to be sent certified mail attached to this checklist. Clearly label list CONTIGUOUS. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the physically contiguous property owners including recorded purchasers under contract for deed. Two sets additional mailing labels with the names and addresses of the physically contiguous property owners including recorded purchasers under contract for deed attached. NOTICE Current property owners of record can be found at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office in the Gallatin County Courthouse 311 West Main Street Bozeman, Montana. CERTIFICATION I, _____________________________________________, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name and address list of all adjoining property owners (including all condominium owners, within 200 feet of the property located at ________________________________________________________, is a true and accurate list from the last declared Gallatin County tax records. I further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project. _______________________________________ Signature CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net Laura Dornberger 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street 4 4 4 1 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE FROM: REBECCA OWENS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER SHAWN KOHTZ, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEER RE: EAST MAIN MASTER SITE PLAN APPLICATION 17040 DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2017 Project Description: A Master Site Plan application with Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) and Deviation review for five (5) new commercial office and mixed use buildings, accessory uses, common parking, access and circulation across four phases of construction on 4.29 acres on the north side of E. Main Street. The property is primarily vacant and with the exception of five residential structures proposed for demolition and the design will be integrated with existing commercial development. The first phase Site Plan with COA application proposes construction of a 2‐story office building of approx. 17,000 sq. ft. with related improvements to the site immediately east of the existing 1019 East Main Street structure. The MSP Deviation per Bozeman Municipal Code Sections 38.25.020, 38.17.080, and 38.17.060 requests a 20% reduction of the 25‐foot entryway corridor setback. The property is located at 1107, 1113, and 1117 E. Main Street and spans several parcels: Block 28, Lot 2C, Plat C‐23‐A21; 50’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 10&11, north 42' of Lots 22‐23; 101’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 6‐9, north 42’ of Lots 24‐ 27 & adjacent street & alley; and 25’x100’ tract consisting of north portion of Lot 12. Recommendation: Staff has found that the project does not comply with the requirements of Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and is deeming the application inadequate for further review. Code corrections must be satisfied prior to a recommendation for approval. 2 Planning Division, Rebecca Owens, rowens@bozeman.net, 582‐2297 Section 2 ‐ RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. These conditions are specific to the development. 1. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. Section 3 – REQUIRED CODE CORRECTIONS All references are to the Bozeman Municipal Code. 1. Section 38.17.080.B BMC Deviation from overlay or underlying zoning requirements. This section notes that an application may be submitted to request a deviation from the setback standard. The application must be accompanied by written and graphic material sufficient to illustrate the initial and final conditions that the modified standards will produce. The review authority shall make a determination that the deviation will (a) produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards, and which will (b) be consistent with the intent and purpose of this article (Article 17, Chapter 38, BMC), and (c) with the adopted design objectives plan for the particular entryway corridor. Upon such a finding, the review authority may authorize deviations of up to 20 percent beyond or below minimum or maximum standards respectively, as established in the underlying zoning district regulations. The development cannot be supported as proposed without adequate findings. The current deviation narrative focuses on the proposed development’s building placement pattern however the reduced setback is the deviation itself, rather than a design solution ‘above and beyond’ development code. Please review the specific application requirements of this section. More detail to satisfy requirements for design that exceeds code, including entryway corridor design guidelines, is required. Clearly describe the contributing elements to the superior design solution in response to (a), (b), and (c) above in the revised deviation narrative. LOCATI has provided additional deviation criteria for review. 2. Section 38.10.050. C Yards. Minimum yards required for the B‐2 district. The development does not meet yard requirements with the underlying lot configurations. a. The lots for future phases 2‐4, must be aggregated or realigned or through the applicable subdivision exemption application and review process in order to meet requirements. The final signed 3 mylars must be provided to our office to satisfy this code requirement. The amendment plat may be filed following the Commission decision. a. Alternatively, the property owner may propose a deed restriction on lots in the development prohibiting independent sale of the lots. We have provided a Restriction of Transfer on the lots which prohibits independent sale of the lots until the non‐conforming lots are addressed via lot aggregation or boundary adjustment/ minor subdivision prior to development of phases associated with these lots. b. Aggregation or a similar solution is the recommended option so as to correct currently non‐conforming lots. c. Any new lot configurations must provide adequate utility infrastructure, easements, and additional agency approvals. d. The site plan for Phase 1 of the development may not be approved until the master site plan is approved, including this correction. 3. Section 38.27.020.E Residential site plans open space requirement. Site plans containing five or more dwelling units shall provide on‐site open space for the use of the residents. The area to be provided is calculated only for those dwellings which do not have ground floor access to a landscaped rear yard. Open space shall be provided at a rate of 150 square feet per dwelling unit for dwellings with two or more bedrooms, and 100 square feet per dwelling unit for studio and one bedroom dwellings. All landscaped areas, public plazas or common green roof decks shall be considered a "commons" and be accessible to all residents of the site. These options may be combined to satisfy the area requirement and in general, must include accessibility and seating area provisions. Please identify proposed open spaces on drawings including details or a table that accounts all residential open space, identified by building and phase, with the master site plan application. Estimates may be revised upon individual site plan application. Integration of open space and landscaping requirements with activated rooftop areas is encouraged. LOCATI has provided calculations for open space. 4. Section 38.27.020. Park area and open space requirements. Parkland is proposed as cash‐in‐lieu of parkland and/or improvements to Lindley Park to meet requirements for residential mixed use buildings 2 & 3 and the calculations are noted for provision with the phase 2 site plan submittal. The master site plan drawings and/or a supplement document must show the quantity of parkland that is required and provided for each phase of development based on actual or estimated/default residential units (even 4 if the proposed dedication amount is “zero”). The official parkland dedication requirement amount and approach will be established when individual site plans are proposed for future phases. LOCATI has provided calculations for parkland. 5. Section 38.19.100.A.10 Plan review criteria. Setbacks. Label both civil and architectural site plans for setbacks. Setbacks for future phases may be adjusted upon reconfiguration of lots and building locations as long as minimum building and parking setback requirements from abutting property boundaries are met. Setbacks have been added and labled on Architectural and Civil drawings. Note we have a zero lot line agreement with all lots within the development, including lots 2B, 1A‐1 and the Carwash. See Access Easement & Zero Lot Agreement. 6. The parties sharing vehicular accesses and parking spaces must enter into a revocable long‐term mutual agreement with review authority approval, running with the term of the designated uses and incorporating both a new driveway from East Main Street and shared circulation with existing development to the west of the subject site. The application includes a draft executed mutual agreement for expanded access easements and zero lot lines. Completion of the agreement is required City review followed by the recording and filing the agreement with the county clerk and recorders office and submitting a copy to the city clerk. New Access Easement and Zero Lot Agreement included. Note Carwash property has been also included as part of this agreement. 7. Section 38.26.010‐100 Landscaping a. Irrigation wells are proposed. A copy of the approved permit for the on‐site irrigation wells must be provided prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. Noted. See letter provided by DNRC. b. Section 38.26.050.C.2.e(3) Parking lot landscaping. The minimum width and/or length of any parking lot landscaped area shall be eight (8) feet. In conjunction with this requirement, scored concrete crosswalks are required at all pedestrian crossings with drive aisles however these walkways and the sidewalks that they connect to cannot make up part of the required landscaping dimensions. Note that pedestrian walkways must not overlay the required 8’ parking lot landscape islands, bump‐outs or internal sidewalk connections. For example, the parking aisle landscaped areas to the north of Building 3B and just south of the Phase 1 trash enclosure, as well as the north‐south pedestrian connection do not appear to meet required dimensions. If a pedestrian walk is used it 5 must be distinct from the parking lot landscaping. This applies to multiple areas of the master plan at phase boundary lines and where new development phases abut existing development to the west, existing non‐conforming conditions for sidewalk design/curbing must be corrected. Also please ensure that with each project phase site plan, it is clear where entire sections or just portions of curbed islands and associated improvements are to be completed in order to ‘knit’ the various phases together. Parking lot landscape islands have been adjusted. The Phase line has been revised and depicts the outline of the each phase. c. Per SP1 checklist item 31, all fences and walls must be included in typical details. A “landscape wall” and retaining wall are depicted on the eastern boundary of the grading plan however neither is shown on any other drawings. Please clarify is this is intended as a site improvement and if so, add to the landscaping plan and add a detailed specification to the L and C sheets. In addition, please clarify if fencing shown on some of the drawings (eastern and northern site boundaries) is intended for removal and in general, align the plan drawings to show the proposed condition. The existing fence along the north boundary of the carwash property will remain in place. The carwash is not part of this development. Only the existing property access at the carwash is getting upgraded to serve the development. No other existing fences will remain. The proposed retaining wall will be incorporated into the design of building 3. The remainder of the retaining wall along parking areas is detailed and included, see Retaining Wall Detail. d. Section 38.26.060 requires additional vegetation or other landscape features for receipt of performance standard points, which must total 23 points that do not include mandatory landscaping provisions or those which may be required through ADR per the entryway corridor overlay district requirements and as the application notes on the LA plans. Note that each phase of development is evaluated for appropriate landscaping performance by site plan/phase and must match the approved master site plan’s landscape plan, or an approved modification to the master plan. Noted. e. Applicant is advised that the landscaping for the entirety of each lot and/or development phase is required to be installed or financially guaranteed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for any building on the lot depicted on the phasing plan. Noted. 6 8. Section 38.23.060.B Easements. This section requires easements for private and public utilities to be shown on the plans and provided if not already done so prior to final plan approval. Private utilities include, but are not limited to, natural gas, electricity, telephone, cable and fiber optic lines. The developer shall provide private utility easements necessary to extend private utilities to the development, and to provide for the construction and maintenance of private utilities within the development. Public utilities including water and sewer mains must also be demonstrated and meet lot requirements. No signed utility easements are provided and some required easements are not shown on plan drawings. For example, at a minimum a ten foot front yard utility easement is required in the front yard of all lots along East Main Street per section 38.23.060.B. Easements have been coordinated. a. 10’ utility along main street b. 30’ water main easement c. Existing Sewer main (south east corner) release & re‐convey d. Existing Sewer main (north east corner) new easement e. Existing utility easement along north property line f. 20’ existing easement along west side of site No easements are required for NWE utilizes. They are all entirely located within lot 2C. 9. Section 38.25.010.A. Improvement schedule. All parking area improvements to include surfacing, drainage, walkways, lighting, landscaping, screening, traffic control, etc., shall be installed according to the provisions of article 39 of this chapter. Show the planned timing for required street trees and related boulevard landscaping improvements as to be noted on the landscaping plan each phase. It is also unclear in the application materials if site lighting, which appears to be depicted by an icon in the landscaped islands but is not in any of the drawing keys, is proposed and if so, it must be described in the improvements schedule for each phase of development. Light poles have been added to the landscape legend. Note added that boulevard trees along main street to be installed with Phase 4. 10. Section 38.39.030.C Improvements and guarantees. This section details completion of improvements for site development. a. The project phase boundaries do not appear to identify all improvements required to support each phase (Parking, landscaping, stormwater management, open space, trash enclosures, utilities, easements, site lighting, vehicular access and 7 pedestrian circulation). What is proposed to be included in each phase? Phase boundary line has been updated and coordinated with all drawings. b. The boundary for the limits of construction in does not appear to include the area between the back of curb and right‐of‐way along East Main Street and the building pad areas. 1) Please extend the construction phasing line to include the areas impacted by each phase of development, including sidewalk area and site access curbing that will require reconstruction to City standards. 2) As part of the phasing update, clarify what phases street trees will be installed during, per Section 38.26.050.E Street frontage landscaping. 3) It appears that some of the phase lines shown on different drawings do not match, such as between the parking lot improvements shown on the civil plan and the planting improvements on the landscaping plan; please clarify if that is the proposal’s intent or otherwise align the phase boundaries. Phase boundary line has been updated and coordinated with all drawings. Notes added to AC1.0 & L1.0 depicting Main Street boulevard trees to be installed with Phase 4. c. Does the applicant intend to request concurrent construction as part of the development phasing? If so, a written request must be submitted. Concurrent construction requested see written request. 11. Section 38.25.040 Number of parking spaces required. The floor area calculation approach has been applied to the B‐2 parking space requirements for proposed office spaces in Buildings 1, 2 and 3A and standard residential parking provisions and associated qualified reductions were applied to Buildings 2 and 3A. The parking provision summary must be updated as follows: Parking calculations have been revised and corrected. a. The last section for Future Building 4 is incorrectly numbered b. The Building 4 section references 22,000 SF however the site drawing shows 20,000 SF. Synchronize the drawing and summary and any associated calculations. c. The Building 4 “provided” line shows 104 spaces however 42 are shown on the site plan and only 42 are required to meet the 222 total required spaces for the development. 12. Section 38.23.170.A.1 Trash and garbage enclosures. Trash enclosures, surrounding standard steel bins (dumpsters), shall be located on the site for convenient pickup service, and the location shall be shown on required site 8 plans. Trash enclosures shall not be located in required front yards, and shall be situated so that containers can be pulled straight out of the enclosure or so the solid waste truck can back straight into it. The location of all trash enclosures shall be subject to review and approval by the city's solid waste division. Solid waste division approval for trash enclosures for all development phases was not provided. As an advisory comment, please ensure that the location of temporary stormwater ponds do not conflict with the trash pad location. It is intended that only for Phase 1 the garbage truck will have to back out of the parking area after unloading the receptacle. Thus, there is no conflict with storm water pond. 13. Section 38.24.100.C and D Street Vision triangle. Driveways and Alleys. Provision for trees in street vision triangle: (1) Single‐stem canopy trees are discouraged but may be permitted in street vision triangles as described in this section, provided that mature trees do not significantly affect safe driving conditions and are maintained such that no canopy foliage exists below a height of ten feet above centerline of intersecting streets. The current plans indicate landscaping to include trees that are in the site vision triangle. Please verify that the proposed species meet the above requirements. In addition, the street vision triangle must be amended to conform to part C of this section, as the subject access is a driveway intersecting an arterial street. See Chapter 38, Appendix A, Figure 38.24.100 for an illustration. Only single‐stem canopy trees exist with in the vision triangles and will be maintained as stated above. 14. Section 38.23.150, BMC ‐ Lighting. Please note luminaire (light fixture) shielding and cutoff requirements for outdoor site lighting per Section 38.23.150.D.7.b and 7.f, and for all lighting in general, per 38.23.150.F.1.c. The proposed lighting meets preferred specifications for LED lighting. However, please note that in terms of cutoff and shielding requirements, it appears that at least one of the selected products utilizes a non‐conforming distribution and is not full cutoff (i.e., the bulb is visible below the shield). This indicates that it is not full cutoff, as required by code (also, as a note for future reference, the City’s forthcoming update to street lighting and pedestrian walkway standards allows for zero Uplight, U‐0). Please identify a compliant alternative product and submit an amended cutsheet set demonstrating the switch. The fixture proposed for the Phase 1 building, has an option to come without the globe. See complete response to Site Plan comments. 15. Section 38.25.020. Parking stall, aisle and driveway design. In any parking facility containing 20 or more parking spaces, a maximum of 25 percent of the provided parking spaces may be reduced in size for small cars, 9 provided these spaces shall be clearly identified with a sign permanently affixed immediately in front of each space containing the notation, "Compacts Only." To meet parking requirements, if the configuration is revised, consider allocating compact vehicle spaces in the site design for up to 25% of the total provided, with associated signage and location per Table 38.25.020, note 1. Only a few compact spaces exist in the Master Site Plan layout and will be signed accordingly when constructed. 16. The applicant must submit a written narrative outlining how each of the conditions of approval and code provisions has been satisfied with the final plan application. Advisory Comments 1. Section 38.17.050 Certificate of appropriateness. The subject site is located in the East Main Class 2 Entryway Corridor Overlay District. Per Chapter 38, Article 17, the plan must undergo Administrative Design Review (ADR) evaluation with Certificate of Appropriateness approval that is independent of the DRC to ensure comprehensive address of design quality according requirements in the Bozeman Design Objectives Plan. In addition, the project size surpasses the 90‐parking space threshold that triggers consideration of an application’s design quality by the Design Review Board (DRB), as would be processed through a DRB staff report and meeting appointment. The ADR process is concurrent with the site plan review. Both the ADR and DRB recommendations will be incorporated with the final application decision documents (i.e., staff report to the Director of Community Development). A DRC‐approved secondary site access is required prior to DRB appointment. Noted. 2. Section 38.17.050 Certificate of appropriateness. No building, demolition, sign, conditional use permit or moving permit shall be issued within an entryway corridor until a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the appropriate review authority and until final action on the proposal has been taken. A Demolition COA application must be provided with or independent of the subject project application if the demolition is proposed in Phase 1 and ahead of building permits for Phases 2 and 3. One permit is required per existing building address. We will submit a Demolition COA for each of the existing buildings. 3. The application includes estimates for the development’s sign plan, including building frontage dimensions and maximum sign area requirements as compare to proposed sign dimensions and area. The draft calculations and sign styles appear to meet code and East Main Entryway Corridor Overlay District requirements. This information 10 and the associated request for signage plan approval must be submitted to Community Development via a separate signage permit application. Please consult with planning technician staff. Noted. 4. Plans and specifications for any fire service line must be prepared in accordance with the City’s Fire Service Line Policy by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system. The applicant shall also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection, post‐construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and domestic services 4” or larger, shall be a standalone submittal, separate from the FSP. City of Bozeman applications for service shall be completed by the applicant. Noted. 5. Master Plan approval shall be granted for an initial period of 5 years per Section 38.19.120.E. An entitlement period of 5 years is requested for the plan if approved. It is upon the applicant to track the approval expiration date. Noted. 6. Section 38.19.100.D Plan review criteria. Following approval of a master site plan, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, sequential individual site plans for specific areas within the master site plan. Each subsequent application for a site plan shall be consistent with the approved master site plan and is subject to the review criteria set forth in subsection 38.19.100.A. Evidence that the review criteria have been met through the master site plan review process may be incorporated by reference in order to eliminate duplication of review. No building permits shall be issued for the site until further development is approved through site plan review. Noted. 7. The applicant is advised to add more detailed guidance to the proposed master plan development design guidelines. Noted. 8. Section 38.24.110 Transportation pathways provides the requirements for transportation pathways including maintenance and easements. The PROST plan calls for a transportation pathway on the far northeast side of the plan, crossing the existing Village Downtown trail corridor. A trail connection may be required with future phases. Noted. 9. Upcoming milestones/dates for this project. Staff will provide a schedule letter for each. a. Revise and resubmit the application for appointment with the DRC for evaluate of code corrections b. Attend Design Review Board meeting (TBD) 11 c. If applicable, RPAB Sub. Rev. Committee or full RPAB (TBD with future phases that include residential uses). d. If applicable, request cash in lieu of parkland from the City Commission (TBD with future phases that include residential uses) Engineering Division, Shawn Kohtz, P.E., skohtz@bozeman.net, 582‐2288 Code Corrections 1. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.24.090.D.3 states: These standards apply to the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and intersections, and the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and other public and/or private accesses. The proposed drive access onto E. Main Street does not meet the requirement of this code section. The applicant must obtain Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) approval for the proposed drive access. If MDT grants approval of the proposed access, the applicant must align the access with the drive access across E. Main Street and provide justification for a deviation from the access separation standards per BMC 38.24.090.H.3. Also, if MDT grants the access, all MDT requirements for the access must be met prior to any site plan approval. We have revised the location for a secondary access built with Phase 1 to be located at the current access to the site. 2. BMC Section 38.24.010.A.8 states: To facilitate traffic movement, the provision of emergency services and the placement of utility easements, all developments shall be provided with a second means of access. The applicant must provide a secondary access for provision of emergency services given the intensified use on this site. A secondary access must be provided in Phase I. Secondary access will be provided with Phase 1. 3. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section 38.24.060.B.4 states: All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole. 12 BMC Section 38.24.060.4.b states an exception: The review authority may grant a waiver from a LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if the review authority determines: (1) Granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest; (2) Improvements to the intersection to raise the overall level of service to a "C" or better are currently scheduled for commencement of construction within three years as shown on the most recently adopted transportation capital improvement plan; (3) All right‐of‐way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been obtained by the city or by the Montana Department of Transportation; and (4) The commission has approved a financing plan for the intersection improvements. The intersection of Highland and Main must be upgraded prior to any phase site plan approval. Alternatively, the applicant must obtain a waiver prior to any phase site plan approval per BMC Section 38.24.060.4.b. Noted. It was discussed with our planner that the waiver will be required prior to the issue of a building permit. Please confirm this is accurate. 4. BMC Section 38.24.080 states: City standard sidewalks (including a concrete sidewalk section through all private drive approaches) shall be constructed in all developments on all public and private street frontages, except for alleys. The requirements of the city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications shall apply. The applicant must construct City Standard sidewalk along the entire property frontage of E. Main Street with any phase site plan approval. A sidewalk that meets city standards along the entire property frontage of E Main St will be constructed with Phase 1. The landscaping and boulevard trees will NOT be installed with Phase 1 but with subsequent adjacent building phases. 5. BMC 38.24.010.A.2 states: The developer shall arrange the streets to provide for the continuation of streets between adjacent developed properties when such continuation is necessary for the convenient movement of traffic, effective provision of emergency services and efficient provision of utilities. 13 The applicant must provide a public access easement along a drive lane between E. Main Street and the northeast corner of the property prior to master site plan approval. An access easement has been incorporated as described. See exhibit in the Access Easement & Zero Lot Agreement. 6. (BMC) Section 38.25.020.M states: Snow removal storage areas shall be provided sufficient to store snow accumulation on site. Such areas shall not cause unsafe ingress/egress to the parking areas, shall not cause snow to be deposited on public rights‐of‐way, shall not include areas provided for required parking access and spaces, and shall not be placed in such a manner as to damage landscaping. The proposed snow storage areas are insufficient. The applicant must provide adequate snow storage areas and demonstrate these areas on the master site plan prior to master site plan approval. Snow storage has been added to the plan. 7. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section 38.23.030.A states: The developer shall install complete drainage facilities in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality and the city, and shall conform to any applicable facilities plan and the terms of any approved site specific stormwater control plan. The city's requirements are contained in the design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications, and by this reference these standards are incorporated into and made a part of these regulations. The applicant must provide stormwater retention calculations for the proposed drywells #1 through #5. Stormwater retention calculations have been included for al drywells. 8. BMC Section 38.23.060.C.1 states: A public utility easement shall be granted for all public utility mains not located within public street right‐of‐way.  The applicant must provide a minimum 30‐foot wide easement for the proposed water main extended into the project site. The easement must be provided on the City Standard form and executed and delivered to the City Engineering Department (Shawn Kohtz) prior to any site plan approval.  The applicant must provide documentation of easements over the existing sanitary sewer mains on the site. If the easements do not exist, the applicant must provide easements for the sewer mains. Easements have been provided see included documents. 14 9. BMC 38.23.070.A.1 states: The developer shall install complete municipal water and sanitary sewer system facilities, or a system allowed by 38.21.030.D, and may be required by the city to install municipal storm sewer system facilities. These systems shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality and the city, and shall conform with any applicable facilities plan. The city's requirements are contained in the Design Standards and Specifications Policy and the City of Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications, and by this reference these standards are incorporated into and made a part of these regulations. The developer shall submit plans and specifications for the proposed facilities to the city and to the state department of environmental quality and shall obtain their approvals prior to commencing construction of any municipal water, sanitary sewer or storm sewer system facilities.  The applicant must obtain approval from the City Water and Sewer Superintendent for the proposed non‐standard sanitary sewer and water service configurations. Service configurations have been revised to meet standard service configurations.  No sanitary sewer services or water services may be installed within 10‐feet of a tree or significant landscape feature. Noted. 10. BMC Section 38.23.180 states: the transfer of water rights or the payment of cash‐in‐lieu (CIL) of water rights shall be provided. - The applicant must provide CIL of water rights prior to site plan approval for each phase. Noted. CIL of water rights calculations have been provided. In addition, an exempt well for irrigation is planned for the use of the entire development landscaping needs. We included a letter from Kari Strasheim, DNRC Water Resources, for a letter confirming the landscaping/irrigation system falls within the requirements for an exempt well. Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard b) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane 15 The document filed shall specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. This is a condition of master site plan approval. Waivers have been included. 2. The applicant must provide temporary barricades at phase terminations where a drive aisle or parking area is intended to be extended in a future phase and does not terminate with curb and gutter to keep vehicle traffic on pavement. All paved areas are terminated with a rollover curb or similar. These areas are limited and this method had proven to work on other developments phased construction. 3. The applicant must adjust the Handicap ramp detail 3/C3.0 to comply with ADA requirements. Detail has been modified to comply. Advisory Comments 1. The applicant must contact the Gallatin County Conservation District, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Montana Department of Transportation, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, Turbidity exemption, etc.) must be obtained by the applicant and provided prior to final plat approval. Noted. Other Department Contacts and Comments (if provided) 1. Building Division; Bob Risk brisk@bozeman.net 406‐582‐2377 2. Parks and Recreation; Carolyn Poissant; cpoissant@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐2908 3. Sustainability Division; Natalie Meyer nmeyer@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2317 4. Solid Waste Division; Kevin Handelin khandelin@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐3238 The Solid Waste Division approves location and design of the proposed refuse enclosure plan for the East Main Development master site plan, 17040. However, if the second access from East Main Street is relocated 16 during likely plan revisions to enter from the current Buggy Bath carwash entrance: (a) Would need a turnaround for the trash service vehicles designed into the plan, (b) Easement/relocate Buggy dumpster and provide enclosure, ensuring service vehicles will not have to back up into the new shared drive access area. Please contact the Solid Waste Division and provide written verification in the revised application of approval for all proposed enclosures and vehicle access requirements. It is not feasible to revise the current refuse enclosure for the carwash. This property is not part of this development and we do not have jurisdiction. 5. Water Conservation; Jessica Ahlstrom jahlstrom@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐2265 Refer to handouts provided at the DRC meeting for irrigation system design requirements and best practices in addition to future building system advisory opportunities. Noted. 6. Stormwater Division; Kyle Mehrens jkmehrens@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2270 7. Fire Department; Trisha Wolford twolford@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2353 The Fire Department is not supportive of the proposed design as relates to waiting for Phase 2 of the project to build the second drive access. A second access for ingress and egress, in addition to the existing access from the southwestern corner of the site to East Main Street, will be required for the Phase 1 site development. This is a standard safety and welfare concern for master planned developments with phasing, as each site phase needs to be fully functional on its own in the case that future phases are stalled. An access from the existing drive area in the southeast corner of the site, for example, would be an appropriate alternative. Secondary access will be provided with Phase 1. 8. Water and Sewer Division; John Alston jalston@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 3200 Refer to the DRC meeting of 2/22/17. Please contact this division if necessary to clarify comments that were provided noting correction needs for a more perpendicular layout and coordinate the relocation of utilities with lot line modification requirements. 17 9. Forestry Division; City Forester; vgalli@bozeman.net 406‐582‐3205 10. NorthWestern Energy; Dustin Workman; dustin.workman@northwestern.com The development has several complex utility requirements. Per DRC comments, the engineering consultant must coordinate with NWE to identify and obtain required service and easements, including to ensure access along/to the northeastern portion of the development. Please update application drawings to show any changes. We have met with Dustin to configure NWE & communication utilities. We are proposing to remove all overhead power lines and burry them. No easements are required because services will be contained on a single lot. Future Impact Fees ‐ Please note that future building permit applications will require payment of the required transportation, water, sewer and fire impact fees according to the City of Bozeman adopted impact fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. If you desire an estimate of the required impact fees according to current rates please contact the Department of Community Development and/or visit www.bozeman.net. Note: During preparation of the staff report for future applications, additional conditions of approval may be recommended based on comments and recommendations provided by other applicable review agencies involved with the review of the project. Project Narrative     Page | 1     | BOZEMAN COMMONS | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana MASTER SITE PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVE The Bozeman Commons Master Site Plan is a phased commercial office and future mixed-use building complex. A new access off of main street will be incorporated with Phase 2 of the development. The Master Site Plan consist of 4.29 acres including (Block 28, Lot 2C, Plat C-23-A21); (50’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 10&11, north 42' of Lots 22-23); (101’x260’ tract consisting of Lots 6-9, north 42’ of Lots 24-27 & adjacent street & alley); (25’x100’ tract consisting of north portion of Lot 12). It is planned to have a total of 5 buildings on the site. Entitlement period of 5 years requested. Site is designed and intended to be fully accessible from public right of ways to each building, as well as, between each building within the site. In addition, ADA parking for each building and pathways to each building entrance will be ADA compliant. Affordable Housing – This site plan does not incorporate any affordable housing Deviation requested for 20% of the standard for front yard setback. See attached materials. Page | 1     | BOZEMAN COMMONS | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana DEVIATION NARRATIVE East main is a class II entry corridor and is anchored by its adjacency to downtown and Lindley park. These two elements combine to be the most defining characteristic of the corridor as we believe is recognized in the Design objectives plan. It is on that basis that we request a deviation from the 25’ setback from Main Street to a 20’ setback as further described below and as allowed by UDC 38.17.080 a. The stated intent of the corridor and guidelines is to introduce and welcome people to the city. The downtown is described as the “core” and a primary goal is to transition to buildings close to the street edge that create a pedestrian friendly environment. The design guidelines acknowledge the inherent vehicular nature of the area, while encouraging the promotion of a pedestrian friendly atmosphere. All this while providing greensward foreground with views to the mountains. Reducing the street setback to 20’ allows the development to meet all goals of the municipal code and guidelines while providing a more defined and consistent pedestrian experience to that of downtown, with a common offset to buildings west of the development, thereby creating a stronger link and transition to the downtown core. For buildings located in Phase 4 of the development and that abut main street we are proposing defined exterior patio space. This will be accomplished with access directly off of the public sidewalk onto defined exterior organized patio/ plazas with furniture, landscape walls and planters. The Master Site Plan does not show this level of detail at this time. The exact layout of these exterior building spaces needs to be designed with each building to accomplish proper integration with the building use and design. These spaces will be defined with each site plan submittal and will be written into the design guidelines for the development. With the added exterior patios and intensified landscaping elements granting the requested deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards. The added features to the building further extend the feeling of “entering the city as soon as possible” b. The Library and Lindley park are two existing exceptions to the typical pedestrian storefront street fabric and setbacks. The more adjacent properties maintain setbacks more consistent with the storefronts of downtown the stronger the exceptions become as focal elements. The primary transitioning elements are the building fronts, continuity of pathways, continuity of street trees and lighting, introduction of a greensward and the inclusion of exterior patios with intensified landscaping and landscape elements defining a public transition space between the automobile transportation path to the building frontages. All of which are achieved and made stronger with the 20’ setback. c. The stated intent of having parking that is screened from the street while still allowing view “opportunities” is further improved with a lesser setback. The closer the buildings to the street the greater the visual screening. A lesser setback provides greater space for parking in the center of the development while screening it from all sides with the building development. The building being positioned closer to main street along with a defined patio and landscaped courts creates a conscious feeling for pedestrians wanting to interact with the buildings and patio/ plazas at hand. This provides a “two-faced” approach with the goal of presenting an improved Page | 2     view shed from Interstate 90 and a visual introduction from I-90 that is building, landscape and pedestrian dominated instead of vehicular in nature. d. The additional landscaping beyond code minimum and with the inclusion of landscape elements such as walls, planters, defined patios, etc. allow the building frontages to create an “enhanced appearance and function while providing visual continuity among other properties” (specifically development within the last two decades). Page | 1     | EAST MAIN DEVELOPMENT | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana CONCURRENT CONSTRUCTION REQUESTED 38.39.030 C Completion time for site development. Whenever any building lots and/or building sites are created inside the city limits, and prior to the issuance of any building permits on such lots or sites, municipal water distribution systems, and municipal sanitary sewer collection systems, and streets shall be provided to the site. Each building site must utilize and be connected to both the municipal water distribution and municipal sanitary sewer collection systems. Subject to the provisions of subsection C.1 of this section, these improvements shall be designed, constructed and installed according to the standards and criteria as adopted by the city and approved by the review authority prior to the issuance of any building permits. 1. Provision of municipal central water distribution, municipal sanitary sewer collection systems, and streets means that the criteria in either subsection a or subsections b and c are met: a. Water, sewer and street services are installed and accepted by the city with service stubs being extended into the site, with such stubs being of adequate size to provide water and sewer service to the proposed development without modification to publicly owned infrastructure; or b. The water mains, sewer mains and streets to be extended to provide service to the development are: located within a publicly dedicated right-of-way or easement; Correct; constructed to city standards; Correct; are physically adjacent to the site proposed for construction; Correct; are installed and accepted by the city; Notes; and are adequate in capacity to provide necessary service to the proposed development; Correct; and comply with the requirements of this subsection C.1.b and subsection C.1.c of this section; c. Water mains, sewer mains and streets shall meet the following requirements: (1) Any required on-site extensions of water mains, sewer mains or streets to be dedicated to the public shall be located entirely within publicly held easements or rights-of-way; Easement has been drafted to meet city standards; shall serve only a single lot; The main extension is only serving a single lot; are the subject of an irrevocable offer of dedication to the city upon completion of the project; Correct; the development is under the control of a single developer who shall retain control of the entire project until final completion; Correct, Bridger View Development; all work is under the supervision of a single general contractor; Correct, Dick Anderson Construction is the general contractor; and no subdivision of land is involved; Correct. (2) The DRC shall determine when the standards of this subsection C.1 are met. Noted.The fire department must consider whether adequate fire protection services are available from existing hydrants, and water supply exists to meet needs during construction. Noted. If adequate fire protection does not exist then concurrent infrastructure and building construction may only occur under the provisions of subsection C.1.c.(3) of this section. Based on evaluation by the fire department, simultaneous construction of infrastructure to be Page | 2     dedicated to the public and private construction may be permitted only within a defined portion of the site; (3) Approval of the final engineering design, including location and grade, for the infrastructure project must be obtained from the engineering department, Noted. and the state department of environmental quality when applicable, Noted. prior to issuance of any building permit for the development; and (4) No occupancy, either temporary or final, may be issued until all on-site and offsite water, sewer and street or drive improvements are installed and accepted or approved as applicable by the city. Noted.   1107 East Main Page 1     October 3, 2016 Shawn Kohtz, PE City of Bozeman Engineering Department RE: 1107 East Main Sewer Capacity Shawn, Laura Dornberger with Locati Architects and Mark Esponda with Dick Anderson Construction have asked us to review the documentation and requirements for the existing waste water system at 1107 East Main, Bozeman, MT. It is our understanding that the property is to be developed, but that the existing sewer service currently does not have the capacity for the new development in addition to the existing structures on site. It is our understanding that the existing structures are to be removed prior to occupancy of the new building and that the existing sewer service is scheduled for upgrade at some point in the future. The goal for the present is to determine if the peak hour sewer flow of the removed structures is less than the anticipated peak hour flow of the proposed new structure. Per previous documentation, the new office building was shown to have 22 Water Supply Fixture Units and the existing buildings being removed have 64 Water Supply Fixture Units (WSFU). In addition, the Drainage Fixture Units (DFU) were calculated for the new proposed building and the existing buildings being removed (based on UPC 2012, chapter 7). Proposed New Building: 23 DFU’s Removed Buildings: 54 DFU’s In addition, for an estimated peak hour flow in gallons per minute, the following is used: New Office Building: 70 Occupants Water Use: 1.6 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (low flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 2.1 gallons per hour per person Estimated New Peak Total: 70 people x 2.1 gallons/hour = 147 gallons per hour. Existing Residential Buildings: 5 Buildings 2 Persons per Building 10 People total Water Use: Shower: 2.5gpm x 10 minutes = 25 gallons per shower per person per hr 3.5 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (old high flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 29 gallons per hour per person   1107 East Main Page 2   Estimated Existing Peak Total: 10 people x 29 gallons = 290 gallons per hour. (note: this number could be higher if clothes washing and dishwashing happen simultaneously with showering and toileting). (note: these numbers assume the old toilets are 3.5 gallons per flush and the new toilets meet current code standards of 1.6 gallons per flush. If the existing toilets have not been replaced in the last 10-15 years, this is likely accurate. If the toilets have not been replaced in 20-30 years, the existing toilets could have flow rates as high as 6 gallons per flush.) Therefore, based on the above information for the three different calculation methods - maximum WSFU, DFU and estimated peak flow - the new building sewer flow will not exceed the existing building sewer flow. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information or clarification. Sincerely, Curtis L. Smit, PE Consulting Design Solutions, Inc. Copy: file Larua Dornberger, Locati Architects Mark Esponda, Dick Anderson Construction | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana   Parking (B-2) Floor Area = 85% x gross SF (or use Sec. 38.25.010 1a to calculate) Office Parking Required: (1 space per 250 SF) Proposed Building 1  Floor Area: 17,147 SF x 85% = 14,575 SF  Parking Required: 14,575 / 250 = 58 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 58 spaces required  Provided 61 spaces provided  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d) Future Building 2 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 5,000 SF x 85% = 4,250 SF  Parking (office): 4,250 / 250 = 17 spaces  Parking (Res.) 15,000 SF (10 Beds) = 10 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 10 x 50% = 5 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 22 spaces required  Provided 64 spaces + 5 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 80  Subtotal Provided 130 Future Building 3 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 4,000 SF x 85% = 3,400 SF  Parking (office): 3,400 / 250 = 14 spaces  Parking (Res.) 12,000 SF (12 Beds) = 12 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 12 x 50% = 6 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 20 spaces required  Provided 29 spaces + 6 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 100  Subtotal Provided 165 Future Building 4A  Floor Area: 16,000 SF x 85% = 13,600 SF  Parking Required: 13,600 / 250 = 55 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 55 spaces required  Provided see 4B  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provide (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 155  Subtotal Provided see 4B Page | 2 Future Building 4B  Floor Area: 18,800 SF x 85% = 15,900 SF  Parking Required: 15,900 / 250 = 64 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 64 spaces required  Provided 54 spaces provided  Bike 7 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 219  Subtotal Provided 219 ______________________________________________________________________ TOTAL PARKING 219 spaces (Includes accessible spaces) Setbacks Setbacks for Buildings: a. Front yard: seven feet, except along arterials where minimum is 25 feet. b. Rear yard: ten feet. c. Side yards: five feet (except zero lot lines as allowed by section 38.21.060). Setbacks for Parking and loading areas: a. Front yard: 25 feet. b. Rear yard; ten feet. 1 c. Side yards: eight feet. 1 1 Side and rear yards for parking may be allowed to be zero feet when coordinated parking arrangements between adjacent properties is provided. Building Height a. Roof pitch less than 3:12: 38 feet. b. Roof pitch 3:12 or greater: 44 feet. d. Maximum height otherwise cumulatively allowed by this section may be increased by 30 percent through the approval of a conditional use permit, but only when the additional height is a specifically identified purpose of the review.   | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana Phase 2 / Building 2 Open Space Required: 150 sf open space x (5) 2 bedroom units = 750 sf Open Space Required = 750 sf (Open space provided by 10’x15’ (min.) private individual balconies to be 750 sf) Phase 3 / Building 3 Open Space Required: 150 sf open space x (6) 2 bedroom units = 900 sf Open Space Required = 900 sf (Open space provided by 10’x15’ (min.) private individual balconies to be 900 sf) Phase 2 / Building 2 Parkland Calculations: Density: 5 units / 4.29 acres = 1.16 units/acre Required Parkland = 5 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.15 acres (6,534 sf) Phase 3 / Building 3 Parkland Calculations: Density: 6 units / 4.29 acres = 1.40 units/acre Required Parkland = 6 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.18 acres (7,841 sf) Cumulative Phase 2&3 / Building 2&3 Parkland Calculations: Density: 11 units / 4.29 acres = 2.56 units/acre Required Parkland = 11 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.33 acres (14,374 sf) Parkland Proposal (estimate):  Estimated Cash in-lieu value for park land not provided = 0.33 AC x $35,000 (estimated value)/AC = $11550.00 (appraisal to determine value at time of phase 2&3 development) Page | 1     | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana PHASE I SIGNAGE Phase 1 office 124 Linear Feet of Building Frontage 25 lf building frontage x 2 sf of signage = 50 sf signage 99 lf building frontage x 1.5 sf of signage = 148.5 sf signage Signage = 198.5 sf of signage allowed x (weighted lot allowance) 400sf max signage /5 buildings sf = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE MASTER SITE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE SIGNAGE PLAN Wall signs are to primarily be comprised of metal letters held slightly in front of the building facade. Font and color may very but must be approved by building owner. Sign design must minimize connections to the building (ie no individual letter attachment). No projecting sings may be permitted unless approved by building owner. It is preferred that signs are internally illuminated. Externally illuminated signs must have approval from the building owner. Signage affixed to the interior of the windows and doors is allowed on the main level of the building and is required to meet all city requirements. At a future date the development may request a low profile sign that identifies the complex which is in addition to the sign area already permitted by UDC. APPROVAL AUTHORITY Building Owner Jerry Locati 1007 E Main St, Ste 202 Bozeman, MT 59715 TOTAL SIGNAGE ESTIMATES Lot signage can be redistributed by percentages so as the total signage for the entire development does not exceed 400 SF Page | 2     BUILDING 1 124 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 99 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 148.5 sf of signage Signage = 198.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 2 133 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 108 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 162 sf of signage Signage = 212 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 3A 46 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 21 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 31.5 sf of signage Signage = 81.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 3B 98 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 3 sf = 75 sf of signage 73 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 109.5 sf of signage Signage = 184.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 4 138 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 3 sf = 75 sf of signage 113 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 169.5 sf of signage Signage = 244.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE DRYWELL #1A REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2 )C * Area Hardscape 0.95 3694 3510Landscape0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 3694 3510 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.08 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.03 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)238 3. Calculate Drywell Volume Existing Soil Condition Fine Sand Percolation Rate (min/in) 31 (see Circular DEQ 4, Percolation Rate (ft/hr) 0.16 Table 2.1-1) Porous Media in Drywell Gravel Void Ratio of Media 30.00% Gravel Offset Dist. From Drywell (ft) 3 Proposed Drywell Gravel Area (ft2)92.1 Infilitration Volume (ft3)29.71 Required Drywell Depth (ft) 7.53 Proposed Drywell Depth (ft) 7.75 (round up to nearest 3") Provided Volume Inc. Perc. (ft3)244 DRYWELL #1B REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2 )C * Area Hardscape 0.95 5016 4765Landscape0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 5016 4765 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.12 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.04 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)323 3. Calculate Drywell Volume Existing Soil Condition Fine Sand Percolation Rate (min/in) 31 (see Circular DEQ 4, Percolation Rate (ft/hr) 0.16 Table 2.1-1) Porous Media in Drywell Gravel Void Ratio of Media 30.00% Gravel Offset Dist. From Drywell (ft) 4 Drywell Gravel Area (ft2)129.3 Infilitration Volume (ft3)41.70 Required Drywell Depth (ft) 7.25 Proposed Drywell Depth (ft) 7.5 (round up to nearest 3") Provided Volume Inc. Perc. (ft3)333 RETENTION POND 1A REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 3827 3635 ROW Landscape 0.2 66 13 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 3893 3648 C=Weighted C Factor 0.94 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.94 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.09 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.03 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)247 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)296 RETENTION POND 1B REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 8118 7712 ROW Landscape 0.2 369 74 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 8487 7786 C=Weighted C Factor 0.92 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.92 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.19 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.07 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)528 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)556 RETENTION POND 1C REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 7756 7368 ROW Landscape 0.2 597 119 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 8353 7488 C=Weighted C Factor 0.90 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.90 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.19 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.07 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)507 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)630 RETENTION POND 1D REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 1969 1871 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 1969 1871 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.05 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.02 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)127 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)153 RETENTION POND 1E REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 1464 1391 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 1464 1391 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.03 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.01 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)94 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)144 RETENTION POND 1F REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 5778 5489 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 5778 5489 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.13 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.05 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)372 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)475 East Main Development Traffic Impact Study Bozeman, Montana Prepared For: C&H Engineering & Surveying 1091 Stoneridge Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 January, 2017 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana i Table of Contents A. Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 1 B. Project Description ........................................................................................ 1 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 1 Adjacent Roadways .............................................................................. 2 Traffic Data ............................................................................................ 2 Historic Traffic Data ............................................................................... 3 Level of Service ..................................................................................... 3 Planned Road Improvements ................................................................ 4 D. Proposed Development .............................................................................. 4 E. Trip Generation and Assignment ................................................................ 6 F. Trip Distribution .......................................................................................... 6 G. Traffic Impacts Outside of the Development ............................................... 6 H. Impact Summary & Recommendations ...................................................... 8 List of Figures Figure 1 – Proposed Development Site ...................................................................2 Figure 2 – Proposed Development ..........................................................................5 Figure 3 –Trip Distribution .......................................................................................7 List of Tables Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data .................................................................................3 Table 2 – 2016 Level of Service Summary ..............................................................4 Table 3 – Trip Generation Rates .............................................................................6 Table 4 – Future Level of Service Summary ...........................................................7 East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 1 January 2017 East Main Development Traffic Impact Study Bozeman, Montana A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The East Main Development is a 4.3-acre, mixed-use project located north of East Main Street in Bozeman, MT. At full build-out in 2019 the project would produce 796 daily vehicle trips. As proposed, the East Main Development will not create any additional roadway capacity problems in this area. While some capacity issues exist in the area, no detailed plans are currently proposed to address these generally minor issues. The impact from the proposed development at these intersections would be minimal. It would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. It would also be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are redeveloped. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This document studies the possible effect on the surrounding road system from a proposed commercial/residential development project located along East Main Street in Bozeman, Montana. The development includes a variety of mixed-use office/commercial properties with attached residential apartments. This document identifies any traffic mitigation efforts that the development may require. The site is located north of East Main Street between Cypress Street and Highland Boulevard. Based on the City of Bozeman Subdivision Regulations, the developers must study all effected intersections within ½ mile of the proposed development, which includes the intersections of East Main Street with Broadway Avenue, Cypress Street, Highland Boulevard, and Haggerty Lane. C. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed development property currently consists of a 4.3-acre parcel of undeveloped land located north of East Main Street which would be developed into mixed-use commercial/residential development. The topography in this area is mostly flat but slopes dramatically downward to the north along the northern edge of the property. Several new professional offices and retail buildings have been constructed to the west of the site including the construction firm of Langlas & Associates, Anderson Zurmuehlen Accounting, the Ferguson gallery, the Bozeman Dharma Center, and Locati Architects & Interiors. These properties are accessed by a single approach onto Main Street east of Cypress Street. This existing approach is located within the existing left-turn lane for Cypress Street and is technically considered a right in/out only approach. However, field observations indicate that almost of half of drivers using the intersection currently turn left into and out of the approach. There are currently five residences on East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 2 January 2017 the east edge of the development property are accessed through an easement across an adjoining property. The Buggy Bath car wash is located just east of the site and has three existing approaches onto Main Street. See Figure 1 for a location map of the proposed development. Figure 1- Proposed Development Site Adjacent Roadways East Main Street is an east/west principal arterial route through the City of Bozeman. In this area the road has a five-lane cross-section and a paved width of 85 feet. The intersections of Broadway Avenue and Highland Boulevard are currently signalized. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH east of the proposed site and decreased to 25 MPH at Cypress Street. According to traffic data available from MDT, the road currently carries 12,700 VPD east of Highland Boulevard. Traffic Counts In December 2016 Abelin Traffic Services (ATS) collected turning movement count data at adjacent intersections along East Main Street. Additional data was obtained from the Bozeman TMP Existing Conditions Memo which identifies traffic volumes and LOS calculations for adjacent intersections. Additional traffic data was obtained for MDT = East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 3 January 2017 identifying historic traffic volumes on East Main Street. The raw traffic data is included in Appendix A of this report. Historic Traffic Data Abelin Traffic Services obtained historic traffic data for East Main Street from the Montana DOT. This data is presented in Table 1. The traffic data history for this area indicates that traffic volumes on East Main Street have not increased in the last ten years. Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data East Main Location 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 East of Highland Drive 12,200 12,230 10,960 11,160 11,920 11,920 11,440 11,610 12,680 12,037 East of Rouse Avenue 14,100 13,520 12,310 12,530 12,550 12,550 12,180 12,360 12,550 11,787 Level of Service Using the data collected for this project, ATS conducted a Level of Service (LOS) analysis at area intersections. This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) - Special Report 209 and the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 6.9. Intersections are graded from A to F representing the average delay that a vehicle entering an intersection can expect. Typically, a LOS of C or better is considered acceptable for peak-hour conditions. Note that the current Bozeman TMP LOS analysis was performed using the Vistro analysis software and the LOS analysis for this project was performed using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 6.9, which produce slightly different results but are generally in agreement about the current traffic operations. Table 2 shows the existing 2016 LOS for the AM and PM peak hours without the traffic from the proposed development. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C. The table shows that the existing intersections along East Main Street have some existing operational issues. The signalized intersection of Highland Boulevard currently operates at LOS D in the PM peak hour. This operational issue could be corrected by the installation of a designated right-turn lane for eastbound traffic at the intersection (identified in the Bozeman TMP). The intersection of Haggerty Lane is experiencing high levels of delay and would require the installation of a traffic signal or modern roundabout for better operation. Plans for a higher level of traffic control at this intersection have been proposed in the past but have not been implemented. The Cypress Street intersection and the existing professional office accesses are also experiencing higher levels of delay in the PM peak hours but there is currently insufficient traffic at this intersection to warrant any higher level of traffic control at these locations (traffic signal or roundabout). East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 4 January 2017 Table 2 – 2016 Level of Service Summary Main Street Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Broadway Avenue 7.7 A 8.4 A Cypress Street* 22.7 C 35.6 E Existing Access 1* 23.3 B 25.4 D Highland Boulevard 15.0 B 37.9 D Haggerty Lane* 33.9 D 425 F *Northbound or Southbound Side Street LOS and Delay Planned Road Improvements The City of Bozeman currently has a variety of improvements planned for the East Main Street area which will be detailed in the upcoming release of the Bozeman Transportation Management Plan (February 2017). These recommended improvements include lane and signal improvements at the Highland Boulevard intersection and geometric improvements and a traffic signal installation at the Haggerty Lane intersection. Long-term plans for the area include widening Highland Boulevard to add additional road capacity for future development. It is expected that most of these improvements will be driven by future growth in the area. D. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development currently under consideration for this site includes 4.3 acres of land located north of East Main Street which would be developed into a mixed-use commercial development. The site would consist of several offices, mixed-retail, and residential apartments. Access to the site would be obtained through the existing shared approach on the west edge of the property and a new proposed approach towards the middle of the development. There are currently no other options available for alternative access to the site except for the two direct approaches onto East Main Street. The developers plan to begin Phase 1 of the development which would include a 17.1 KSF office building in 2017 and would not include the new approach onto East Main Street. It is expected that development of the remaining properties would be completed by 2019. The East Main Development site plan is shown in Figure 2. East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 5 January 2017 Figure 3 – Proposed East Main Development East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 6 January 2017 E. TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT ATS performed a trip generation analysis to determine the anticipated future traffic volumes from the proposed developments using the trip generation rates contained in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Ninth Edition). These rates are the national standard and are based on the most current information available to planners. A vehicle “trip” is defined as any trip that either begins or ends at the development site. ATS determined that the critical traffic impacts on the intersections and roadways would occur during the weekday morning and evening peak hours. According to the ITE trip generation rates, at full build-out the development would produce 105 AM peak hour trips, 101 PM peak hour trips, and 796 daily trips. The Phase 1 office would produce 189 daily vehicle trips. See Table 3 for detailed trip generation information. Table 3 - Trip Generation Rates Land Use Units AM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit Total AM Peak Hour Trip Ends PM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit Total PM Peak Hour Trip Ends Weekday Trip Ends per Unit Total Weekday Trip Ends Phase 1 Office 17.12 ksf 1.56 27 1.49 26 11.03 189 Office Lot 2 22 ksf 1.56 34 1.49 33 11.03 243 Office Lot 3 16 ksf 1.56 25 1.49 24 11.03 176 Business Park Lot 4 5 ksf 1.43 7 1.29 6 12.76 64 Residential Lot 4 6 units 0.51 3 0.62 4 6.65 40 Business Park Lot 5 4 ksf 1.43 6 1.29 5 12.76 51 Residential Lot 5 5 units 0.51 3 0.62 3 6.65 33 Total 105 101 796 F. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The traffic distribution and assignment for the proposed subdivisions was based upon the existing ADT volumes along the adjacent roadways and the peak-hour turning volumes. Traffic is expected to distribute onto the surrounding road network as shown on Figure 3. G. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT Using the trip generation and trip distribution numbers, ATS determined the future Level of Service for the area intersections. The anticipated intersection LOS with the East Main Commercial development is shown in Table 4. These calculations are included in Appendix B of this report. East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 7 January 2017 Figure 3 – Trip Distribution Table 4 indicates that the construction of the East Main Street commercial development will not cause any new roadway capacity problems along East Main Street. The existing capacity problems at the area intersection will be largely unaffected by the proposed development. As proposed, the new access onto West Main Street will function at LOS C at full build out of the property. It would be desirable to add separated southbound lanes at the existing site access or at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. If the second access onto West Main Street was eliminated and all traffic from the proposed development were forced onto the existing approach, the intersection would function at LOS E (45.3 seconds of delay). It should also be noted the existing approach is adjacent to the existing left-turn lane for Cypress Street and is technically a right in/out only approach, although drivers are currently treating this access as a full- movement approach. It could be desirable to formalize the right in/out approach at the existing location using lane channelization and use the new approach location to service the left-turn traffic for the existing and proposed site traffic. Table 4 –Future Level of Service Summary Main Street Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Broadway Avenue 7.9 A 8.5 A Cypress Street* 25.4 D 38.7 E Existing Access 1* 21.6 C 30.6 D Proposed Access 2* 12.3 B 15.1 C Highland Boulevard 16.2 B 38.7 D Haggerty Lane* 36.5 E 456 F *Northbound or Southbound Side Street LOS and Delay An analysis was also performed for Phase 1 of the development to determine if the construction of the Phase 1 office building alone could be accommodated with the existing single approach into Cypress Main Street 13% 15% 20% 50% East Main Commercial Development 0% 2% Highland Haggerty East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 8 January 2017 the property. The analysis suggests that the existing approach would still function at LOS D with 26.0 seconds of peak-hour delay with the Phase 1 office building, which is a minimal change from the existing conditions (25.4 seconds of delay). It would be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are developed. H. IMPACT SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS As proposed, the East Main Development will not create any additional roadway capacity problems in this area. While some capacity issues exist in the area, no detailed plans are currently proposed to address these generally minor issues. The impact from the proposed development at these intersections would be minimal. It would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. It would also be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are redeveloped. APPENDIX A Traffic Data File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 2 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 07:45 AM 1 0 1 0 2 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 14 Total 1 0 1 0 2 7 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 16 08:00 AM 0 0 2 0 2 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 25 08:15 AM 0 0 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 17 *** BREAK *** Total 0 0 4 0 4 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 19 42 *** BREAK *** 04:30 PM 7 0 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 14 04:45 PM 11 0 4 0 15 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Total 18 0 6 0 24 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 31 05:00 PM 13 0 9 0 22 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 24 05:15 PM 3 0 4 0 7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 05:30 PM 8 0 6 0 14 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17 Grand Total 43 0 30 0 73 35 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 31 139 Apprch %58.9 0 41.1 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 Total %30.9 0 21.6 0 52.5 25.2 0 0 0 25.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22.3 0 22.3 Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 2 0 2 2 97 0 0 99 178 07:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2 1 130 2 0 133 2 0 9 1 12 0 167 0 0 167 314 Total 0 0 0 2 2 2 206 2 0 210 2 0 11 1 14 2 264 0 0 266 492 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 149 1 0 6 0 7 2 127 0 0 129 285 08:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 127 1 0 128 1 0 7 0 8 1 114 0 0 115 253 *** BREAK *** Total 0 0 0 2 2 0 276 1 0 277 2 0 13 0 15 3 241 0 0 244 538 *** BREAK *** 04:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 175 2 0 179 0 0 3 0 3 3 153 0 0 156 341 04:45 PM 1 0 0 1 2 2 176 0 0 178 1 0 4 1 6 8 138 1 0 147 333 Total 2 0 0 3 5 4 351 2 0 357 1 0 7 1 9 11 291 1 0 303 674 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 179 1 0 181 3 0 1 2 6 12 156 0 0 168 355 05:15 PM 2 0 1 0 3 0 153 1 0 154 0 0 6 0 6 7 191 1 0 199 362 05:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 142 2 0 146 1 0 2 1 4 3 145 0 0 148 301 Grand Total 5 0 1 9 15 9 1307 9 0 1325 9 0 40 5 54 38 1288 2 0 1328 2722 Apprch %33.3 0 6.7 60 0.7 98.6 0.7 0 16.7 0 74.1 9.3 2.9 97 0.2 0 Total %0.2 0 0 0.3 0.6 0.3 48 0.3 0 48.7 0.3 0 1.5 0.2 2 1.4 47.3 0.1 0 48.8 Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 2 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 2 0 2 2 97 0 0 99 178 07:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2 1 130 2 0 133 2 0 9 1 12 0 167 0 0 167 314 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 149 1 0 6 0 7 2 127 0 0 129 285 08:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 127 1 0 128 1 0 7 0 8 1 114 0 0 115 253 Total Volume 0 0 0 4 4 2 482 3 0 487 4 0 24 1 29 5 505 0 0 510 1030 % App. Total 0 0 0 100 0.4 99 0.6 0 13.8 0 82.8 3.4 1 99 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .500 .500 .500 .809 .375 .000 .817 .500 .000 .667 .250 .604 .625 .756 .000 .000 .763 .820 Cypress Main Main Cypress Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 4 InOut Total 2 4 6 Right2 Thru482 Left3 Peds0 OutTotalIn509 487 996 Left 24 Thru 0 Right 4 Peds 1 Out TotalIn 8 29 37 Left0 Thru505 Right5 Peds0 TotalOutIn506 510 1016 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Class 1 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 3 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:30 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 175 2 0 179 0 0 3 0 3 3 153 0 0 156 341 04:45 PM 1 0 0 1 2 2 176 0 0 178 1 0 4 1 6 8 138 1 0 147 333 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 179 1 0 181 3 0 1 2 6 12 156 0 0 168 355 05:15 PM 2 0 1 0 3 0 153 1 0 154 0 0 6 0 6 7 191 1 0 199 362 Total Volume 4 0 1 3 8 5 683 4 0 692 4 0 14 3 21 30 638 2 0 670 1391 % App. Total 50 0 12.5 37.5 0.7 98.7 0.6 0 19 0 66.7 14.3 4.5 95.2 0.3 0 PHF .500 .000 .250 .375 .667 .625 .954 .500 .000 .956 .333 .000 .583 .375 .875 .625 .835 .500 .000 .842 .961 Cypress Main Main Cypress Right 4 Thru 0 Left 1 Peds 3 InOut Total 7 8 15 Right5 Thru683 Left4 Peds0 OutTotalIn643 692 1335 Left 14 Thru 0 Right 4 Peds 3 Out TotalIn 34 21 55 Left2 Thru638 Right30 Peds0 TotalOutIn701 670 1371 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Class 1 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 2 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 07:45 AM 1 0 1 0 2 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 14 08:00 AM 0 0 2 0 2 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 25 08:15 AM 0 0 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 17 Total Volume 1 0 5 0 6 26 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 26 58 % App. Total 16.7 0 83.3 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 PHF .250 .000 .625 .000 .750 .591 .000 .000 .000 .591 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .542 .000 .542 .580 Offices Main Main Offices Right 1 Thru 0 Left 5 Peds 0 InOut Total 52 6 58 Right26 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn5 26 31 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 0 0 Left26 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn1 26 27 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Class 2 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 3 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:30 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 11 0 4 0 15 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 05:00 PM 13 0 9 0 22 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 24 05:15 PM 3 0 4 0 7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 05:30 PM 8 0 6 0 14 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17 Total Volume 35 0 23 0 58 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 67 % App. Total 60.3 0 39.7 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 PHF .673 .000 .639 .000 .659 .750 .000 .000 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .750 .000 .750 .698 Offices Main Main Offices Right 35 Thru 0 Left 23 Peds 0 InOut Total 9 58 67 Right6 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn23 6 29 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 0 0 Left3 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn35 3 38 Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM Class 2 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 APPENDIX B Traffic Model East Main Development Traffic Model AM Peak Hour Existing 2016 Traffic 0 1 1 26 0 0 0 0 1 2 23 114 0 614 0 616 0 642 0 463 0 773 93 524 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 379 0 92 East Main 41 0 24 26 0 0 0 0 173 2 62 508 596 0 574 0 579 0 287 1 332 0 5 4 1 0 1 1 264 129 83 49 Seasonal Factor 1 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty PM Peak Hour Existing 2016 Traffic 0 5 35 6 0 0 8 0 1 0 31 138 0 799 0 768 0 774 6 428 0 496 140 675 0 4 23 0 0 2 3 155 1 69 East Main 73 2 14 3 1 0 3 1 341 2 97 685 795 0 796 0 819 0 612 0 811 0 30 4 1 1 0 2 180 363 150 95 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty East Main Development Traffic Model IN 89 AM Peak Hour 40%OUT 16 60% Site Generated Traffic 6 36 10 53 4 12 6 19 2 10 6 12 19 17 8 2 3 31 East Main 12 23 35 6 12 2 46 58 35 2 3 3 2 0 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty IN 21 PM Peak Hour 40%OUT 80 60% Site Generated Traffic 32 8 48 13 21 3 31 4 10 52 31 3 4 4 42 11 17 7 East Main 3 5 8 28 3 0 11 14 8 11 17 15 11 2 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty East Main Development Traffic Model AM Peak Hour Total Projected Traffic 0 1 5 38 6 19 0 0 1 2 23 116 0 624 0 622 0 654 0 482 0 790 93 532 0 3 7 2 3 0 0 379 0 92 East Main 53 0 24 49 0 35 0 0 185 2 64 554 654 0 609 0 581 0 290 1 335 0 5 4 1 0 1 1 266 129 83 49 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty PM Peak Hour Total Projected Traffic 0 5 56 9 31 4 8 0 1 0 31 148 0 851 0 799 0 777 6 432 0 500 140 717 0 4 34 0 17 2 3 155 1 69 East Main 76 2 14 8 1 8 3 1 344 2 97 696 809 0 804 0 830 0 629 0 826 0 30 4 1 1 0 2 191 363 152 95 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty APPENDIX C Level of Service HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)1 596 5 3 614 1 24 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)1 3 32 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)942 956 235 758 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 8.8 22.7 9.8 Level of Service, LOS A A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 22.7 9.8 Approach LOS C A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:36:00 AMCypressAM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 795 30 4 799 5 14 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 5 21 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)775 759 138 642 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 9.8 35.6 10.6 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.1 35.6 10.6 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:37:36 AMCypressPM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)26 574 1 2 616 26 0 0 1 5 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)30 2 1 7 Capacity, c (veh/h)916 983 784 204 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 8.7 9.6 23.3 Level of Service, LOS A A A C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.4 0.0 9.6 23.3 Approach LOS A C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:38:09 AMEx1AM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)3 796 1 2 768 6 1 0 1 23 0 35 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)3 2 2 66 Capacity, c (veh/h)800 781 191 242 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.27 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.5 9.6 24.1 25.4 Level of Service, LOS A A C D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 24.1 25.4 Approach LOS C D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:38:39 AMEx1PM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 332 83 92 773 2 62 0 49 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 105 126 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)764 1087 247 568 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.10 0.51 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.3 2.7 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 8.7 33.9 11.4 Level of Service, LOS A A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.9 33.9 11.4 Approach LOS D B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:39:08 AMHaggertyAM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 811 150 69 496 0 97 0 95 1 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 81 226 2 Capacity, c (veh/h)987 614 129 164 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.13 1.75 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.5 17.1 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.7 11.8 425.4 27.3 Level of Service, LOS A B F D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 1.4 425.4 27.3 Approach LOS F D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:39:45 AMHaggertyPM.xtw HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak Hour PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainAM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 41 508 524 114 93 0 23 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 53.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 80.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 58.0 58.0 22.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.6 10.8 7.7 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 3.1 3.1 0.1 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 302 315 415 390 130 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1442 1546 1699 1593 1579 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.0 6.6 7.4 8.8 5.7 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 5.8 6.6 7.4 8.8 5.7 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.21 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 1007 1024 1126 1056 336 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.300 0.307 0.369 0.369 0.388 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)40.7 44.8 62.3 57.2 52.9 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)1.6 1.7 2.4 2.3 2.1 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 5.5 5.7 6.0 6.0 27.0 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 27.3 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 5.7 A 6.1 A 0.0 27.3 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 7.7 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.0 A 1.1 A 0.7 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:40:06 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak Hour PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainPM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 73 685 675 138 140 0 31 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 48.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 74.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 53.0 53.0 21.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 14.5 11.7 9.9 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 4.2 4.3 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.02 0.00 0.06 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 396 456 455 428 192 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1278 1561 1716 1614 1598 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 1.2 12.5 9.7 9.4 7.9 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 11.0 12.5 9.7 9.4 7.9 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.22 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 888 1013 1113 1047 346 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.446 0.450 0.409 0.409 0.556 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)53.9 68.4 65 60.3 74.9 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.9 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 6.0 6.5 6.2 6.2 25.8 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 6.1 6.6 6.3 6.3 27.0 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.4 A 6.3 A 0.0 27.0 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 8.4 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.2 A 0.8 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 9:00:29 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak Hour PHF 0.79 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainAM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 287 264 379 463 0 173 1 129 0 1 0 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 13.8 27.9 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 70.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 32.9 18.8 51.8 18.2 18.2 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 12.9 12.5 2.0 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.7 0.8 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 351 323 480 586 0 219 165 0 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 826 1716 1454 1634 1716 0 1410 1456 0 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 10.8 12.0 10.9 4.8 0.0 10.4 7.2 0.0 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 10.8 12.0 10.9 4.8 0.0 10.5 7.2 0.0 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.40 0.40 0.40 0.63 0.67 0.19 0.19 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 433 685 581 599 2294 368 275 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.513 0.556 0.800 0.256 0.000 0.595 0.599 0.000 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.3 108.8 105.4 75.1 32.2 0 85.1 61.2 0 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 4.3 4.2 3.0 1.3 0.0 3.3 2.4 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 12.6 15.9 16.2 10.5 4.6 27.3 26.0 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 2.6 3.7 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 12.7 18.5 19.9 11.4 4.9 27.9 26.8 Level of Service (LOS)B B B B A C C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 19.2 B 7.8 A 27.4 C 23.1 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 15.0 B Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.0 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.1 A 1.4 A 1.1 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:40:06 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak Hour PHF 0.88 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainPM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 612 180 155 428 0 341 0 363 3 6 8 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 8.6 31.4 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 95.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 35.4 12.6 48.0 47.0 47.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.3 3.3 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.4 45.0 22.8 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 Phase Call Probability 0.99 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 1.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 482 444 176 486 0 388 413 19 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 906 1716 1581 1634 1716 0 1392 1454 1068 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 24.8 24.8 6.4 8.4 0.0 21.8 20.6 0.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 24.8 24.8 6.4 8.4 0.0 43.0 20.6 20.8 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.45 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 376 568 523 266 1590 396 658 528 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.848 0.849 0.663 0.306 0.000 0.979 0.627 0.037 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.5 300 280 60 82.2 0 339.1 172.5 5.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 11.8 11.0 2.4 3.2 0.0 13.3 6.8 0.2 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 21.3 29.6 29.6 21.6 15.9 38.5 19.9 15.1 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 13.1 14.1 1.1 0.5 0.0 39.5 1.4 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 21.3 42.7 43.6 22.7 16.4 78.0 21.3 15.1 Level of Service (LOS)C D D C B E C B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 43.1 D 18.1 B 48.8 D 15.1 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 37.9 D Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.1 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.0 A 1.8 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 9:00:29 AM HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)1 654 5 3 624 1 24 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)1 3 32 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)933 900 209 752 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.9 9.0 25.4 9.8 Level of Service, LOS A A D A Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 25.4 9.8 Approach LOS D A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:46:32 AMCypressAMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed PM Peak With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 809 30 4 851 5 14 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 5 21 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)735 748 128 613 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.16 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.9 9.8 38.7 10.9 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.1 38.7 10.9 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:47:08 AMCypressPMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)49 609 1 2 622 38 0 0 1 7 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)56 2 1 14 Capacity, c (veh/h)899 947 760 231 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh)9.3 8.8 9.7 21.6 Level of Service, LOS A A A C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.7 0.0 9.7 21.6 Approach LOS A C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:48:12 AMEx1AMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)8 804 1 2 799 9 1 0 1 34 0 56 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)9 2 2 100 Capacity, c (veh/h)787 789 182 238 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.42 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.6 9.6 25.1 30.6 Level of Service, LOS A A D D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.1 0.0 25.1 30.6 Approach LOS D D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:48:53 AMEx1PMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Proposed App. Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Proposed Approach Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)35 581 1 2 654 19 0 0 1 3 0 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Left Only 1 Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)40 2 1 10 Capacity, c (veh/h)888 975 780 505 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.02 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.2 8.7 9.6 12.3 Level of Service, LOS A A A B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.5 0.0 9.6 12.3 Approach LOS A B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:49:56 AMProp2AMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Proposed App. Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Proposed Approach Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)8 830 1 2 777 4 3 0 2 17 0 31 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Left Only 1 Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)9 2 5 54 Capacity, c (veh/h)794 754 299 411 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.13 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 Control Delay (s/veh)9.6 9.8 17.3 15.1 Level of Service, LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.1 0.0 17.3 15.1 Approach LOS C C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:51:05 AMProp2PMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 335 83 92 790 2 64 0 49 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 105 129 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)751 1084 239 559 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.10 0.54 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.3 2.9 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.8 8.7 36.5 11.4 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.9 36.5 11.4 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:51:51 AMHaggertyAMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 826 152 69 500 0 97 0 95 1 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 81 226 2 Capacity, c (veh/h)983 603 125 159 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.13 1.81 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.5 17.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.7 11.9 456.0 27.9 Level of Service, LOS A B F D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 1.4 456.0 27.9 Approach LOS F D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:52:25 AMHaggertyPMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainAMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 41 554 532 116 105 0 23 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 53.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 80.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 58.0 58.0 22.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 9.3 11.3 8.3 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 3.4 3.4 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 327 341 436 409 144 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1452 1546 1699 1593 1583 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.0 7.3 7.6 9.3 6.3 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 6.4 7.3 7.6 9.3 6.3 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.21 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 1013 1024 1126 1055 336 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.323 0.333 0.387 0.387 0.428 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)44.8 49.5 66.3 60.8 59 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)1.8 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 27.3 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 5.7 5.9 6.2 6.2 27.6 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 5.8 A 6.2 A 0.0 27.6 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 7.9 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.0 A 1.1 A 0.7 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:00 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainPMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 73 693 717 148 143 0 31 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 48.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 74.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 53.0 53.0 21.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 14.8 12.6 10.1 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 4.3 4.3 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.02 0.01 0.07 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 400 461 459 432 196 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1258 1561 1716 1613 1599 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 1.6 12.8 10.6 9.5 8.1 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 12.2 12.8 10.6 9.5 8.1 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.22 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 875 1013 1113 1046 346 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.457 0.455 0.413 0.413 0.566 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)54.7 69.4 66 61.1 76.8 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 3.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 6.1 6.5 6.2 6.2 25.9 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 6.2 6.6 6.3 6.3 27.2 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.4 A 6.3 A 0.0 27.2 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 8.5 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.3 A 0.8 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:59 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.79 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainAMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 290 266 379 482 0 185 1 129 0 1 0 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 14.2 26.9 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 70.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 31.9 19.2 51.0 19.0 19.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 13.2 13.2 2.0 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 386 354 480 610 0 234 165 0 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 808 1716 1454 1634 1716 0 1410 1456 0 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 12.5 13.9 11.2 5.2 0.0 11.2 7.1 0.0 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 12.5 13.9 11.2 5.2 0.0 11.2 7.1 0.0 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.38 0.38 0.38 0.61 0.66 0.20 0.20 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 413 659 559 567 2257 383 290 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.585 0.633 0.847 0.270 0.000 0.611 0.567 0.000 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.3 128.7 125.4 80.7 35.7 0 90.5 60.1 0 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 5.1 4.9 3.2 1.4 0.0 3.6 2.4 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 13.3 17.1 17.5 11.5 5.0 26.9 25.3 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 3.6 5.1 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 13.3 20.7 22.6 12.9 5.3 27.5 25.9 Level of Service (LOS)B C C B A C C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 21.6 C 8.6 A 26.9 C 22.5 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 16.2 B Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.0 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.1 A 1.4 A 1.1 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:00 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.88 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainPMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 629 191 155 432 0 344 0 363 3 6 8 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 8.6 31.4 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 95.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 35.4 12.6 48.0 47.0 47.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.3 3.3 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.4 45.0 22.8 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 Phase Call Probability 0.99 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 1.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 489 449 176 491 0 391 413 19 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 902 1716 1578 1634 1716 0 1392 1454 1068 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 25.3 25.3 6.4 8.5 0.0 21.9 20.6 0.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 25.3 25.3 6.4 8.5 0.0 43.0 20.6 20.8 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.45 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 374 568 522 262 1590 396 658 528 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.861 0.861 0.672 0.309 0.000 0.987 0.627 0.037 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.5 308.5 287.5 60.1 83.2 0 346.8 172.5 5.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 12.1 11.3 2.4 3.3 0.0 13.7 6.8 0.2 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 21.3 29.7 29.7 21.8 16.0 38.5 19.9 15.1 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 14.0 15.0 1.1 0.5 0.0 41.5 1.4 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 21.3 43.7 44.8 22.9 16.5 80.0 21.3 15.1 Level of Service (LOS)C D D C B F C B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 44.2 D 18.2 B 49.9 D 15.1 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 38.7 D Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.1 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.3 A 1.0 A 1.8 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:59 AM 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 406-459-1443 March 8, 2017 Matt Hausauer C&H Engineering 1091 Stoneridge Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 RE: East Main Development Access Dear Matt, it is my understanding that the developers of East Main Development in Bozeman have reached an agreement with an adjacent property owner to use the existing approach into the Buggy Bath carwash to provide access to the East Main Development. This approach is currently one of three approaches for the Buggy Bath carwash and also provides access to the five residential homes north of the carwash. These homes are planned for demolition in Phase I of the East Main Development. With access to the Buggy Bath car wash approach, the new approach onto Main Street proposed as part of the East Main development is no longer necessary. The overall projected traffic volumes at the carwash approach would be largely the same as the previously proposed access and would have the same operational characteristics as described in the January 2017 TIS produced for this project. The TIS suggested that the approach would function at LOS C with the proposed development. A review provided by MDT dated February 22, 2017 for the original TIS provided preliminary approval for the new access location but also requested the closure of the existing approach on the western edge of the property. The proposed development is required to have two means of ingress/egress for emergency services. The new access proposal for the East Main Development will not create any new approaches or move any existing approaches on Main Street. With the new access plan, the developers plan to maintain the existing approach on the western edge of the property and are willing to sign the existing approach as right-in/out only. The existing Buggy Bath car wash approach is 20 ft wide and will be widened by 6 feet to provide efficient access to the East Main development. As suggested in the original TIS, it would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. Sincerely, Bob Abelin, P.E. PTOE Abelin Traffic Services, Inc. CITY OF BOZEMAN HYDRANT PRESSURE/FLOW REQUEST FORM Date: 1/20/17 Location Hydrant # Static Pressure Pitot Pressure Residual Pressure E. Main / Cypress 211 124 115 E. Main East of Cypress 234 72 Requested By: Robert Blakeman Fax # Nozzle Size Flowed: 2.5” Done By: ES / AO Comments: 1425 GPM 1 Laura Dornberger From:Brian Heaston <bheaston@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent:Monday, January 09, 2017 9:58 AM To:Matt Hausauer Cc:Laura Dornberger; Shawn Kohtz Subject:RE: CIL Water Rights - East Main Project Hi Matt,    I’ll get you in the ballpark at this point and we can finalize at the time you’re ready to obtain FSP approval.  Irrigation  water is a sizeable component of the annual use, so the LA will need to perform an estimate of the irrigation water  requirement for each Phase.  This of course assumes that the public system is supplying the irrigation water and not a  well.  If a well is proposed, then you’ll need to provide a letter from the DNRC that water use for the  landscaping/irrigation system falls within the parameters of the exemption (35 gpm/10AF).     ‐ Annual water use for office bldgs is approximately 10,000 gal/1,000 ft^2 of space.    ‐ Annual water use for commercial retail is ~5,000 gal/1,000 ft^2 of space  ‐ If it’s restaurant space in the commercial area then use is ~150,000 gal/1,000 ft^2  ‐ MF residential is .124 AF/unit    CIL WR fee is $6k/AF    Fee estimates (note: does not account for irrigation water for landscape areas and assumes retail not restaurant for  commercial use).  Again, will finalize as the FSPs come through.    ‐ Bldg 1: 0.5 AF/yr => $3,000  ‐ Bldg 2: 0.8 AF/yr => $4,800  ‐ Bldg 3A: 0.7 AF/yr => $4,200  ‐ Bldg 3B: 0.5 AF/yr => $3,000  ‐ Bldg 4: 0.6 AF/yr => $3,600  .  Questions or concerns, let me know.    Brian    From: Matt Hausauer [mailto:mhausauer@chengineers.com] Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 4:18 PM To: Brian Heaston Cc: Laura Dornberger Subject: CIL Water Rights - East Main Project   Hi Brian,    We’re working on a new site plan for the East Main development that includes the existing Locati Building and Mountain  View Building (Langlas office). Can you provide the CIL of water rights calculations for each of the proposed buildings?  Phase 1 (Building 1) is the current priority.    Building 1: 17,118 SF – Office  Building 2: 5,000 SF Commercial and 15,000 SF Residential (6 two‐bedroom units)  2 Building 3A: 4,000 SF Commercial and 12,000 SF Residential (5 two‐bedroom units)  Building 3B: 16,000 SF Office  Building 4: 20,000 SF Office    Please let me know if you have any questions.    Thanks!    Matt Hausauer, P.E.  www.chengineers.com   "This message and/or attachment contains confidential information. Distribution of this information must be only to those of C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc employees or individuals contractually approved to receive this information. If you are not the addressee and/or are not authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose,forward, print or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message."   City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may  be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender  and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record  retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be  protected from disclosure under law. 1 Laura Dornberger Subject:Bozeman Site Plan - East Main From: Strasheim, Kerri [mailto:kstrasheim@mt.gov]   Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 12:18 PM  To: Matt Hausauer <mhausauer@chengineers.com>  Cc: Laura Dornberger <ldornberger@LocatiArchitects.com>; Lain Leoniak <LLeoniak@BOZEMAN.NET>  Subject: RE: Bozeman Site Plan ‐ East Main    Matt – Thank you for your patience – we have been busy. I have reviewed your request. Per the information provided in your emails on January 9, 2017, the proposed water use for Lot 2C of Plat C-23- A21 of the Northern Pacific Addition will not exceed 10 acre-feet (AF). The proposed new use is for approximately 0.5 AF of lawn and garden irrigation, for up to 1.25 AF. This lot falls under the 1993 rule for combined appropriations. The new well cannot exceed a diversion rate of 35 gallons per minute (GPM) or 10 AF. No water right permitting is required ahead of time. In Clark Fork Coalition, et. al. v. DNRC, et. al., 2016 MT 229, 384 Mont. 503, 380 P.3d 771, the Montana Supreme Court concluded that the definition of “combined appropriation” in Admin. R. Mont. 36.12.101(13) was invalid. The Court reinstated the Department’s 1987 Rule defining “combined appropriation” as: “An appropriation of water from the same source aquifer by means of two or more groundwater developments, the purpose of which, in the department’s judgment, could have been accomplished by a single appropriation. Groundwater developments need not be physically connected nor have a common distribution system to be considered a “combined appropriation.” They can be separate developed springs or wells to separate parts of a project or development. Such wells and springs need not be developed simultaneously. They can be developed gradually or in increments. The amount of water appropriated from the entire project or development from these groundwater developments in the same source aquifer is the “combined appropriation.” Under this Rule, the Department interprets subdivisions that are pending before the Department of Environmental Quality for approval on October 17, 2014 or filed after that date to be a single project that can be accomplished by a single appropriation. Consequently all wells in such a subdivision will be considered a “combined appropriation” for the purposes of Mont. Code Ann. 85-2-306. The only exception to this interpretation is that a subdivision which has received preliminary plat approval prior to October 17, 2014 will not be considered a project under the “combined appropriation” 1987 Rule; individual lots will still be evaluated under the 1987 Rule at the time of an application to the Department. 2015 Mont. Laws § 1, Ch. 221. This does not serve as a pre-approval for a water right. Thank you, Kerri ___________________ Kerri Strasheim Regional Manager DNRC Water Resources - Bozeman 2273 Boot Hill Court, Suite 110 Bozeman, MT 59715 2 Ph: 406-556-4504 Fax: 406-587-9726 kstrasheim@mt.gov    Page | 1     | EAST MAIN DEVELOPMENT | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana DEVELOPMENT DESIGN GUIDELINES The East Main Development Master Site Plan design guidelines are intended to create a cohesive development that adds to the character to the extension of Main Street. Each phase will need to address and meet all UDC standards. SITE: The entire site is to be accessible and have pedestrian connections between all buildings. Each phase should address exterior space for the occupants. Exterior site features such as benches & planters are to be incorporated with each building pad site and should be unique in design and materials but complement the building they support. This will give each building site its own identity while ensuring all phases provide similar amenities. All utilities are to be installed underground. Meters are to be placed on the least public side of each building or screened so they are not easily seen. All satellite antennas are to be screened so they are not seen from public ways. BUILDINGS: Building exterior materials are to complement the existing 2 professional buildings to the west of the site. Exterior materials must require low maintenance. Exterior color schemes shall emphasize the natural tones of the surrounding natural environment and those of a existing development. Brick is not required but recommended to be present. Other suggested materials are metals, engineered products (i.e. high density laminates or acrylic panels), pre- finished anodized aluminum storefront glazing and include building metal details. The use of sloped roofs in combination with flat roofs is strongly recommended to help maintain the cohesive character to the development. Gutters and snow guards are to be used on any roof over a pedestrian path to provide safe environment. Each building must include awnings, canopies or balconies to create accents on the building to create interest where the designer intends the focus to be. Phase 4 of the Master Site Plan must add and integrate exterior patio/ plaza space along main street to meet the requirement for deviation setback requirements. The patios must provide direct access to the public sidewalk, provide visual buffers and define the space between the patio/ plaza and the sidewalk. The patio/ plaza shall create a pedestrian friendly buffer between Page | 2     the vehicular traffic and the building façade. They also provide a decorative feature that provides interest and establishes a sense of human scale. This space is to be defined with, but not limited, to furniture, benches, art & sculptures, landscape walls, planters, and additional landscaping above code minimum. The Master Site Plan does not show this level of detail. The exact layout of these exterior building spaces needs to be designed with each building to accomplish proper integration with the building use and design. These exterior spaces will be reviewed with each COB Site Plan submittal to confirm the exterior patios/ plazas and intensified landscaping elements produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards to meet the requirements necessary for the 20’ setback deviation. Sequential individual site plan submittals for each specific phase of the Master Site Plan must be submitted to Jerry Locati for design review approval and the COB planning department for approval. Each site plan phase application shall be consistent with the approved Master Site Plan and subject to the review criteria of Section 38.19.100A BMC. EXISTING UTILITESEXISTING UTILITES a C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEMSPLEASE NOTE:1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED,ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 9" (230 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTIONEQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FOR COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS.NOTES:1. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418 "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".2. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".3. "ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS" TABLE ABOVE PROVIDES MATERIAL LOCATIONS, DESCRIPTIONS, GRADATIONS, AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS FOR FOUNDATION, EMBEDMENT, AND FILL MATERIALS.4. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE WITHCONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS.PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS.5. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C'OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION.MATERIAL LOCATIONDESCRIPTIONAASHTO MATERIALCLASSIFICATIONSCOMPACTION / DENSITYREQUIREMENTDFINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTSFROM THE TOP OF THE 'C' LAYER TO THE BOTTOMOF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHEDGRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASEMAY BE PART OF THE 'D' LAYERANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PERENGINEER'S PLANS. CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENTSUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS.N/APREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS.PAVED INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENTMATERIAL AND PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS.CINITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C'STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENTSTONE ('B' LAYER) TO 24" (600 mm) ABOVE THETOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENTSUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER.GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35%FINES OR PROCESSED AGGREGATE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEUOF THIS LAYER.AASHTO M145¹A-1, A-2-4, A-3ORAASHTO M43¹3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89,9, 10BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 24" (600 mm) OFMATERIAL OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REACHED.COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN 12" (300 mm)MAX LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FORWELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVEDENSITY FOR PROCESSED AGGREGATEMATERIALS.BEMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THECHAMBERS FROM THE FOUNDATION STONE ('A'LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONEAASHTO M43¹3, 4AFOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERSFROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM)OF THE CHAMBER.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONEAASHTO M43¹3, 4PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLATSURFACE. ² ³45"(1140 mm)24"(600 mm) MIN*8'(2.4 m)MAX12" (300 mm) TYP77" (1950 mm)ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALLAROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERSSUBGRADE SOILS(SEE NOTE 4)PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)MC-3500END CAP12" (300 mm) MIN9"(230 mm) MINDEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MINDCBA*TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVEDINSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,INCREASE COVER TO 30" (750 mm).PERIMETER STONE(SEE NOTE 6)EXCAVATION WALL(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL)6" (150 mm) MINNO COMPACTION REQUIRED.*FOR COVER DEPTHS GREATER THAN 8.0' (2.4 m) PLEASE CONTACT STORMTECHPART #STUBBCMC3500IEPP06T6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)---MC3500IEPP06B---0.66" (17 mm)MC3500IEPP08T8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)---MC3500IEPP08B---0.81" (21 mm)MC3500IEPP10T10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)---MC3500IEPP10B---0.93" (24 mm)MC3500IEPP12T12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)---MC3500IEPP12B---1.35" (34 mm)MC3500IEPP15T15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)---MC3500IEPP15B---1.50" (38 mm)MC3500IEPP18TC18" (450 mm)20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18BC---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP24TC24" (600 mm)14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24BC---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP30BC30" (750 mm)---NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH)77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm)CHAMBER STORAGE109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE*178.9 CUBIC FEET (5.06 m³)WEIGHT135.0 lbs.(61.2 kg)NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH)77.0" X 45.0" X 22.5" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 571 mm)END CAP STORAGE14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE*46.0 CUBIC FEET (1.30 m³)WEIGHT50.0 lbs.(22.7 kg)*ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION AND BETWEEN CHAMBERS,12" (305 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITYMC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONNTS90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLEDBUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTIONNOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINALCUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZE AND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS.CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500 END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOT RECOMMENDEDFOR PIPE SIZES GREATER THAN 10" (250 mm)THE INVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B' ARE THE HIGHTEST POSSIBLE FOR THE PIPE SIZE.LOWER JOINTCORRUGATIONWEBCRESTCRESTSTIFFENING RIBVALLEYSTIFFENING RIBBC77.0"(1956 mm)45.0"(1143 mm)25.7"(653 mm)FOOT77.0"(1956 mm)45.0"(1143 mm)STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B"STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION22.5"(571 mm)INSTALLEDINSPECTION & MAINTENANCESTEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW FOR SEDIMENTA. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAINA.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLEDA.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOGA.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL)A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.B. ALL ISOLATOR ROWSB.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROWB.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW THROUGH OUTLET PIPEi) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRYii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLEB.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW USING THE JETVAC PROCESSA. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERREDB. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEANC. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIREDSTEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS.STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM.NOTES1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUSOBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS.2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY.SUMP DEPTH TBD BYSITE DESIGN ENGINEER(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED)24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIREDUSE FACTORY PRE-CORED END CAPPART #: MC3500IEPP24BCTWO LAYERS OF ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 315WTM WOVENGEOTEXTILE BETWEEN FOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS8.25' (2.51 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMSCATCH BASINORMANHOLECOVER PIPE CONNECTION TO ENDCAP WITH ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601TNON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILEMC-3500 CHAMBERMC-3500 END CAPMC-3500 ISOLATOR ROW DETAILNTSOPTIONAL INSPECTION PORTSTORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDSFLEXSTORM PURE INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAMSTRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES18" (450 mm) MIN WIDTHPAVEMENTMC-3500 6" INSPECTION PORT DETAILNTSCONCRETE COLLARMC-3500 CHAMBERCONCRETE SLAB8" (200 mm) MIN THICKNESS12" (300 mm) NYLOPLAST INLINEDRAIN BODY W/SOLID HINGEDCOVER OR GRATEPART# 2712AG6IP*SOLID COVER: 1299CGC*GRATE: 1299CGSCONCRETE COLLAR NOT REQUIREDFOR UNPAVED APPLICATIONS6" (150 mm) PVC SCH40 PIPE(BY OTHERS)FLEXSTORM CATCH ITPART# 6212NYFXWITH USE OF OPEN GRATE6" (150 mm) INSERTA TEEPART# 6IPSSTIP*INSERTA TEE TO BE CENTERED INVALLEY OF CORRUGATIONS* THE PART# 2712AG6IPKIT CAN BEUSED TO ORDER ALL NECESSARYCOMPONENTS FOR A SOLID LIDINSPECTION PORT INSTALLATIONC & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING 24"x 36"http://www.usa.lighting.philips.comindoorlighting.applications@philips.comoutdoorlighting.applications@philips.comProject #:Created By:Revision #:Size:Date:Page #:Project:Agent:Specifier:ARCH D3/20/17Page 1 of 1DescriptionR1R2R3R4R5.........................Rev. Date.........................Rev. #The calculations set forth herein are based on project specifications provided to PHILIPS.  Actual ormeasured values may differ from forecasted results due to tolerances in calculation methods, testingprocedures, component procedures, component performance, measurement techniques and varyingfield conditions such as, but not limited to, line voltage, temperature, atmospheric/environmentalconditions and improper or undocumented lamp burn‐in procedures.  Further, room dimensions,reflectances, furniture andarchitectural elements within the space may significantly affect calculations.Verification of the calculations herein, including design acceptability, and compliance with anyapplicable lighting codes is not the responsibility of PHILIPS, and shall be the responsibility of thearchitect, owner, or owners representative, as applicable. Please refer to Luminaire Schedule for lightloss factor (LLF) details used in the calculations.DisclaimerR. Johnstone18323‐00195 Locati East Main ‐ Bozeman, MTTom Craver ‐ Northern Rockies AgencyRob Rohe - Locati ArchitectsR1Scale: 1 inch= 20 Ft.549101019 E MAIN ST55410955103512' BUILDING SETBACK FROM TOP OF BANKTOP OF BANK10' SETBACKmountain view buildingJBL LLCC9CB‐2ZONINGSS8" SSEXIST SEWER SERVICE, ALONG TOP OF BANKB‐2ZONINGCCSSCCCTOP OF BANKLOT 1A‐131,302 SF0.7185 ACLOT 13A104,878 SF2.40766 ACLOT 2CLOT 2B43,192 SF0.9915 ACCCCexisting998106PHASE 1PHASE 4PHASE 2910766101079FUTUREMIXED USE building 23 STORY5,000 SF COMM.15,000 SF RES22 REQ'D PARKING SPACES3 STO4,000 SF C12,000 SF20 REQ'D S552 STORY17,147 SF TOTAL58 REQ'D SPACES61 SPACES PROVIDED(2 ACCESSIBLE)proposed office building 1PHASE 366510PlazaPlazaPlaza54 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED29 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED6 GARAGE SPACES PROVIDED61 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED64 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED5 GARAGE SPACES PROVIDEDvillage investment groupR‐OZONING666CCCA1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.250.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.5 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.6 1.3 2.0 2.6 2.4 1.7 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.0 2.0 3.2 4.4 3.9 2.5 1.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 0.9 1.9 3.3 4.6 4.3 2.7 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2 2.5 4.4 6.2 4.6 3.2 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 1.0 2.4 4.3 6.1 4.8 3.5 1.9 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.1 2.3 3.9 4.6 4.8 2.9 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 1.0 2.1 3.6 4.6 4.8 2.9 1.6 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.6 2.5 3.2 2.9 1.9 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 0.7 1.4 2.3 3.0 2.8 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.7 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 1.5 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.4 2.4 3.5 3.6 2.6 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 1.9 3.4 4.7 5.0 3.8 2.1 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.8 2.0 3.5 4.8 5.1 3.9 2.2 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.9 1.6 2.5 3.6 3.9 2.9 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.10.0 0.1 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.9 1.8 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.9 1.8 1.3 0.8 0.3 0.10.0 0.2 0.8 1.7 2.7 3.6 3.2 2.2 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.6 2.3 3.2 3.7 3.0 2.0 1.7 1.8 2.5 3.4 3.3 2.2 1.3 0.5 0.10.0 0.2 1.0 2.3 4.0 5.0 4.6 3.1 1.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.5 2.8 4.7 5.2 4.6 2.8 2.3 2.4 3.7 4.8 4.6 3.3 1.8 0.7 0.10.0 0.2 1.1 2.4 4.1 5.5 4.6 3.2 1.8 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.4 2.8 4.6 5.9 4.6 2.9 2.3 2.5 4.0 5.3 4.8 3.5 1.9 0.7 0.10.0 0.2 0.9 1.8 2.9 4.0 3.6 2.3 1.3 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.1 2.1 3.3 4.1 3.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.8 4.0 3.8 2.5 1.5 0.6 0.10.0 0.1 0.5 1.1 1.7 2.2 2.0 1.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.3 1.9 2.2 1.9 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.4 0.10.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.60.0 0.0 0.1 0.00.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.00.9 1.4 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.1 0.01.8 2.7 3.0 2.4 1.5 0.8 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.5 1.5 2.7 4.6 4.6 3.8 2.2 1.1 0.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.4 1.7 3.2 4.6 6.6 4.5 2.6 1.2 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.4 1.4 2.5 4.2 4.6 3.5 2.1 1.0 0.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 1.6 2.4 2.7 2.1 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Luminaire ScheduleProject:  Locati East Main ‐ Bozeman, MTSymbolQtyLabelArrangementManufacturerDescriptionArr. WattsLum. WattsLum. LumensLLFBUG Rating 7A1SINGLEPHILIPS LIGHTING, LITTLESTOWNCXF1464‐G2‐5N7‐16  on 12' pole136.5136.5129740.850B4‐U0‐G2Calculation SummaryLabelAvgMaxMinAvg/MinMax/MinCalcTypeUnitsGrid Size (Ft.)Grid Height (Ft.)# PtsAll points1.046.60.0N.A.N.A.IlluminanceFc100729Phase I Parking Area1.496.100.00N.A.N.A.IlluminanceFc279Phase I Parking AreaIlluminance (Fc)Average = 1.49Maximum = 6.10Minimum = 0.00Avg/Min Ratio = N.A.Max/Min Ratio = N.A.No. Points = 279 C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ””C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ””C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING Type: Model: Project: www.intrigueled.com N60 W14592 Kaul Avenue Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 P: (877) 965 0005 F: (262) 436 1745 EPIC L E D W a l l M o u n t shown with shepherds crook wall mount General: The classic contemporary style of the Epic blends well into a variety of architectural styles, both past and present. Appropriate for pedestrian scale installations, the varied mounting and top options provide an aesthetic appeal. Construction: Top, housing, and mounting gear are constructed of low copper content cast aluminum. Shade shall be spun aluminum. Stainless steel external hardware to protect against the exterior elements. Lens: Glass globe available in opal (-OL) or clear (-CL). Tops: Two top styles available: Cone (straight arm only) and Dome. LED Light Engine: LED module located in upper housing with LED module offering 37 nominal input watts. Available in color temperatures of 3000K, 3500K, 4000K, and 5000K. Minimum CRI = 80. Driver: Constant current LED driver; input voltage of 120v to 277v, mounted internal to fixture. Heat Sink: Finned heat sink shall be extruded aluminum and shall be located in housing above LED module. Mounting: Two wall mount styles available: straight arm and shepherds crook. Finish: Textured polyester powder coat finish. Shade underside is standard white finish. Black, bronze, grey, white, silver, and verde green options available. For custom colors, please consult factory. Gaskets: EPDM gaskets standard. Weight: WA 28 lbs WAS 27 lbs Listings: ETL Listed to UL 8750. IESNA LM79. Type: Model: Project: www.intrigueled.com N60 W14592 Kaul Avenue Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 P: (877) 965 0005 F: (262) 436 1745 F I X T U R E D E T A I L IES files can be found on website. Content of specification sheets is subject to change. Please consult website for current product detail. ☐ WA Straight Arm Wall Mount ☐ WAS Wall Arm Shepherds Crook Mount MOUNTING ☐ CL Clear Glass Globe ☐ OL Opal/Translucent Glass Globe ☐ UNV 120v – 277v; output current 700mA ☐ BLK Black finish ☐ BRZ Bronze finish ☐ GRY Grey finish ☐ SIL Silver finish LENS FINISH ☐ 30K 3000K ☐ 35K 3500K ☐ 40K 4000K ☐ 50K 5000K COLOR (kelvin) VOLTAGE WATTAGE ☐ C Cone ☐ D Dome TOP STYLE SERIES MOUNTING WATTAGE CCT (kelvin) TOP STYLE LENS VOLTAGE FINISH ------- ☐ EC Epic Wall Mount SERIES ☐ VGN Verde Green finish ☐ WHT White finish ☐ CC Custom Color – consult factory ☐ WGF Woodgrain finish – consult factory ☐ 37LED 37 input watts 3,700 100 3000 3,750 101 3500 3,750 101 4000 3,800 103 5000 37 > 80 50,000 hrs 700mA 48.0 Inverted available with WLU option only. WSR LED Series Light Engines Performance Package Distribution Voltage Mounting Options3 Finish (required) WSR LED 1 One engine (10 LEDs) 2 Two engines (20 LEDs) 700 mA options: 10A700/30K 3000K 10A700/40K 4000K 10A700/50K 5000K SR2 Type II SR3 Type III SR4 Type IV MVOLT 1 120 1 208 1 240 1 277 1 347 480 Shipped included (blank)Surface mount Shipped separately 2 BBW Surface-mounted back box UT5 Uptilt 5 degrees Shipped installed PE Photoelectric cell, button type 4, 5 SF Single fuse (120, 277, 347V) 4 DF Double fuse (208, 240, 480V) 4 DMG 0-10V dimming driver (no controls) ELCW Emergency battery backup 6 WLU Wet location door for up orientation 7 PIR Motion/ambient light sensor 8 DS Dual switching 9 SPD Separate surge protection 10 Shipped separately VG Vandal guard WG Wire guard DDBXD Dark bronze DBLXD Black DNAXD Natural aluminum DWHXD White DSSXD Sandstone DDBTXD Textured dark bronze DBLBXD Textured black DNATXD Textured natural aluminum DWHGXD Textured white DSSTXD Textured sandstone WSR LED Architectural Wall Sconce Luminaire Ordering Information EXAMPLE: WSR LED 2 10A700/40K SR3 MVOLT DDBTXD Catalog Number Notes Type Height:7-1/4” (18.4 cm) Width:18” (45.7 cm) Depth:9” (22.8 cm) Weight: 17 lbs(7.7 kg) One Lithonia Way • Conyers, Georgia 30012 • Phone: 800.279.8041 • www.lithonia.com © 2011-2016 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All rights reserved. Hit the Tab key or mouse over the page to see all interactive elements. Optional Back Box (BBW) Height:4” (10.2 cm) Width:5-1/2” (14.0 cm) Depth:1-1/2” (3.8 cm) 5-1/2 4 1-1/2 WALL SCONCE BBW (Back Box Wall) MOUNTING H W 5-1/2 4 1-1/2 WALL SCONCE BBW (Back Box Wall) MOUNTING DFor 3/4” NPT side-entry conduit Specifications Introduction The classic Architectural Wall Sconce is now available with the latest in LED technology. The result is a long-life, maintenance-free product with typical energy savings of 75% compared to metal halide versions. The integral battery backup option provides emergency egress lighting, without the use of a back-box or remote gear, so installations maintain their aesthetic integrity. The WSR LED is ideal for replacing existing 50 – 175W metal halide wall-mounted products. The expected service life is 20+ years of nighttime use. W H D NOTES 1 MVOLT driver operates on any line voltage from 120-277V (50/60 Hz). Specify 120, 208, 240 or 277 options only when ordering with photocell (PE), fusing (SF, DF), or dual switching (DS). 2 May also be ordered separately as an accessory. Ex: WSBBW DDBXD U. Must specify finish. 3 Must be ordered with fixture; cannot be field installed. 4 Not available with MVOLT option. Button photocell (PE) can be ordered with a dedicated voltage option. Single fuse (SF) requires 120, 277 or 347 voltage option. Double fuse (DF) requires 208, 240 or 480 voltage option. 5 Not available with 480V option. Not available with motion/ambient light sensor (PIR). 6 Integral battery pack is rated for -20° to 60°C operating temperature. ELCW warranty is 3-year period. Not available with 347V or 480V. Not available with WLU. Not available with ELCW. 7 WLU not available with PIR or ELCW. 8 Specifies the SensorSwitch SFOD-7-ODP control (photocell included); see Motion Sensor Guide for details. Includes ambient light sensor. Not available with “PE” option (button type photocell). Dimming driver standard. Not available with WLU, VG or WG. 9 Provides 50/50 luminaire operation via two independent drivers and light engines on two separate circuits. Not available with one engine, MVOLT, ELCW, WLU, SF, or DF. Must specify voltage; voltage must be the same for both drivers. When ordered with photocell (PE) or motion sensor (PIR), only the primary power source leads will be controlled. 10 See electrical section on page 2 for more details. The emergency battery backup (ELCW option) is integral to the luminaire - no external housing required! This design provides reliable emergency operation while maintaining the aesthetics of the product. All ELCW configurations include an independent secondary driver with an integral relay to immediately detect AC power loss. Dual light engines are wired in parallel so both engines operate in emergency mode and provide additional component redundancy. These design features meet various interpretations of NFPA 70/NEC 2008 - 700.16 The emergency battery will power the luminaire for a minimum duration of 90 minutes (maximum duration of three hours) from the time supply power is lost, per International Building Code Section 1006 and NFPA 101 Life Safety Code Section 7.9, provided luminaires are mounted at an appropriate height and illuminate an open space with no major obstructions. The examples below show illuminance of 1 fc average and 0.1 fc minimum of the single-engine Type IV product in emergency mode. WST LED 1 10A700/40K SR4 MVOLT ELCW 10’ x 10’ Gridlines 8’ and 12’ Mounting Height Emergency Battery Operation 8’ MH 12’ MH WSR-LED Rev. 10/06/16 1 See electrical load chart for 347/480V system watts. Light Engines Drive Current (mA) Performance Package System Watts (MVOLT1) Dist. Type 40K (4000K, 70 CRI) Nominal Lumens B U G LPW 1 (10 LEDs)700 10A700/--K 24W SR2 2,005 1 0 1 84 SR3 2,029 1 0 1 84 SR4 1,959 1 0 1 82 2 (20 LEDs)700 10A700/--K 47W SR2 3,944 1 0 1 84 SR3 4,028 1 0 1 86 SR4 3,851 1 0 1 82 Lumen values are from photometric tests performed in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08. Data is considered to be representative of the configurations shown, within the tolerances allowed by Lighting Facts. To see complete photometric reports or download .ies files for this product, visit Lithonia Lighting’s WSR LED homepage. Performance Data Photometric Diagrams FEATURES & SPECIFICATIONS INTENDED USE The classic architectural shape of the WSR LED was designed for applications such as hospitals, schools, malls, restaurants, and commercial buildings. The long life LEDs and driver make this luminaire nearly maintenance-free. CONSTRUCTION The single-piece die-cast aluminum housing integrates secondary heat sinks to optimize thermal transfer from the internal light engine heat sinks and promote long life. The driver is mounted in direct contact with the casting for a low operating temperature and long life. The die-cast door frame is fully gasketed with a one-piece solid silicone gasket to keep out moisture and dust, providing an IP65 rating for the luminaire. FINISH Exterior parts are protected by a zinc-infused Super Durable TGIC thermoset powder coat finish that provides superior resistance to corrosion and weathering. A tightly controlled multi-stage process ensures a minimum 3 mils thickness for a finish that can withstand extreme climate changes without cracking or peeling. Standard Super Durable colors include dark bronze, black, natural aluminum, sandstone and white. Available in textured and non-textured finishes. OPTICS Precision-molded acrylic lenses are engineered for superior distribution, uniformity, and spacing in wall-mount applications. Light engines are 4000K (70 CRI). The WSR LED has zero uplight and qualifies as a Nighttime Friendly™ product, meaning it is consistent with the LEED® and Green Globes™ criteria for eliminating wasteful uplight. ELECTRICAL Light engine(s) consist of 10 high-efficacy LEDs mounted to a metal core circuit board and integral aluminum heat sinks to maximize heat dissipation and promote long life (100,000 hrs at 25°C, L77). Class 2 electronic driver has a power factor >90%, THD <20%. The electronic driver has a power factor of >90%, THD <20%, and a minimum 2.5 KV surge protection. When ordering the SPD option, a separate surge protection device is installed within the luminaire which meets a minimum Category C low operation (per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2). INSTALLATION A universal mounting plate with integral mounting support arms allows the fixture to hinge down for easy access while making wiring connections. LISTINGS CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards. Light engines are IP66 rated; luminaire is IP65 rated and suitable for wet locations when mounted with the lenses down. WLU option offers wet location listing in “up”orientation. Rated for -30°C minimum ambient. DesignLights Consortium® (DLC) qualified product. Not all versions of this product may be DLC qualified. Please check the DLC Qualified Products List at www.designlights.org to confirm which versions are qualified. WARRANTY 5-year limited warranty. Complete warranty terms located at: www.acuitybrands.com/CustomerResources/Terms_and_conditions.aspx. Note: Actual performance may differ as a result of end-user environment and application. All values are design or typical values, measured under laboratory conditions at 25 °C. Specifications subject to change without notice. One Lithonia Way • Conyers, Georgia 30012 • Phone: 800.279.8041 • www.lithonia.com © 2011-2016 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All rights reserved. WSR-LED Rev. 10/06/16 Lumen Output 1 Higher wattage is due to electrical losses from step-down transformer. Current (A) Light Engines Drive Current (mA)System Watts 120 208 240 277 347 480 1 700 24W 0.24 0.14 0.12 0.1 - - 29W 1 - - - -0.09 0.07 2 700 47W 0.44 0.27 0.23 0.20 - - 53W 1 - - - - 0.17 0.12 Electrical Load Isofootcandle plots for the WSR LED 2 10A700/40K SR2, SR3, and SR4. Distances are in units of mounting height (12’). Use these factors to determine relative lumen output for average ambient temperatures from 0-40°C (32-104°F). Lumen Ambient Temperature (LAT) Multipliers Ambient Lumen Multiplier 0°C 32°F 1.10 10°C 50°F 1.06 20°C 68°F 1.02 25°C 77°F 1.00 30°C 86°F 0.98 40°C 104°F 0.92 Projected LED Lumen Maintenance Data references the extrapolated performance projections for the WSR LED 2 10A700 platform in a 25°C ambient, based on 10,000 hours of LED testing (tested per IESNA LM-80-08 and projected per IESNA TM-21-11). To calculate LLF, use the lumen maintenance factor that corresponds to the desired number of operating hours below. For other lumen maintenance values, contact factory. Operating Hours 0 25,000 50,000 100,000 Lumen Maintenance Factor 1.0 0.94 0.88 0.77 LEGEND 0.1 fc 0.5 fc 1.0 fc Test No. 2489033-9 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR2 Test No. 2489033-8 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR3 Test No. 2489033-7 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR4 Distribution overlay comparison to 175W metal halide. LEGEND WSR LED, 0.5 fc WSR HID, 0.5 fc 10’ W Sidewalk LLDs: WSR HID = 0.72 WSR LED = 0.95 WSR LED 2 10A700 40K SR4,WSR 175M FT Probe, 12’ Mounting Ht WSR HID:213W WSR LED:47W led 1 sr3 ELCW plan view Scale 1" = 40' 250 x 100' building 10' sidewalk 8' mtg ht over door contours at 1.0 fc (red) 0.5 fc (blue) on grade Calculated values include direct and interreflected components. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 1 of 5 Project: Location: Cat.No: Type: Lamps: Qty: Notes: Urban Westbrook CXF14 and CXF15 The Philips Hadco Westbrook pendant luminaires offer a simple and modern look but still traditional, providing style and performance to work in several urban applications including residential streets, city streets, campuses, parking lots and retail centers. These pendants use the latest LED technology which maximizes energy savings and provides uniform and comfortable light. CXF14 CXF15 Ordering guide: Luminaire Example: CXF15-32-G2-A-2-W-A-3-DA-AST-SP2-H-F Series LED's Generation G2 Finish Optics CCT Voltage Drive current CXF14 Westbrook CXF15 Westbrook 32 1 32 LEDs 48 48 LEDs 64 64 LEDs 80 2 80 LEDs G2 A Black B White G Verde H Bronze I Gray J Green 2 Type II 3 Type III 4 Type IV 5 Type V W 3000K N 4000K A 120-277 VAC B 1, 3 347-480 VAC 3 350mA 5 530 mA 7 2 700mA Ordering guide (continued)Optional programs Optional dimming 1st option 2nd option 3rd option Surge protection Luminaire options Spinning DA 4 Hrs 25% Reduction DB 4 Hrs 50% Reduction DC 4 Hrs 75% Reduction DD 6 Hrs 25% Reduction DE 6 Hrs 50% Reduction DF 6 Hrs 75% Reduction DG 8 Hrs 25% Reduction DH 8 Hrs 50% Reduction DJ 8 Hrs 75% Reduction DALI Compatible with DALI N No dimming AST Adjustable start up N No 1st option CLO Constant light output N No 2nd option OTL Over the life N No 3rd option SP1 10kV/20kA SP2 20Vk/20kA H House side shield N No options F Fluted spinning N No options Footnotes 1. 32 LED at 350mA and 530mA are not compatible with 347-480V. 2. Can't use 700mA with 80LED's. 3. 347-480V not compatible with optional dimming or optional programming. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 2 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire CXF15 Width:26" diameter Height:22-5/16" EPA:1.6 sq. ft Weight: (maximum)38 lbs (17.24 kg)22.27" (565mm) 26.00" (660mm) 22.27" (565mm) 26.00" (660mm) Dimensions CXF14 Width:21" diameter Height:22-5/16" EPA:1.6 sq. ft Weight: (maximum)38 lbs (17.24 kg)22.11" (561mm) 20.65" (524mm) 22.11" (561mm) 20.65" (524mm) Predicted Lumen Depreciation Data Ambient Temperature °C Driver mA Calculated L70 Hours L70 per TM-21 Lumen Maintenance % at 60,000 hrs 25°C 700 mA >100,000 hours >60,000 hours >87% Predicted performance derived from LED manufacturer’s data and engineering design estimates, based on IESNA LM-80 methodology. Actual experience may vary due to field application conditions.L70 is the predicted time when LED performance depreciates to 70% of initial lumen output. Calculated per IESNA TM21-11. Published L70 hours limited to 6 times actual LED test hours. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 3 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire LED Wattage and Lumen Values: Westbrook CXF14 / CXF15 4000K Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Ordering Code Total LEDs LED Current (mA) Average System Watts 1 Color Temp. Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating CXFxx32-G2-N3-16 32 350 35 4000K 4,134 117 B1-U0-G1 4,012 114 B1-U0-G1 3,913 111 B1-U0-G1 3,803 108 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-N5-16 32 530 51 4000K 5,850 114 B1-U0-G1 5,678 111 B1-U0-G1 5,537 108 B1-U0-G1 5,381 105 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-N7-16 32 700 71 4000K 7,671 109 B2-U0-G1 7,445 106 B1-U0-G2 7,260 103 B1-U0-G2 7,055 100 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-N3-16 48 350 52 4000K 5,994 116 B1-U0-G1 5,818 113 B1-U0-G1 5,673 110 B1-U0-G2 5,514 107 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-N5-16 48 530 75 4000K 8,483 113 B2-U0-G2 8,232 110 B2-U0-G2 8,028 107 B2-U0-G2 7,802 104 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-N7-16 48 700 103 4000K 11,122 108 B2-U0-G2 10,794 104 B2-U0-G2 10,526 102 B2-U0-G2 10,230 99 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N3-16 64 350 68 4000K 7,602 112 B2-U0-G1 7,378 108 B1-U0-G2 7,195 106 B1-U0-G2 6,993 103 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N5-16 64 530 99 4000K 10,758 109 B2-U0-G2 10,441 105 B2-U0-G2 10,182 103 B2-U0-G2 9,895 100 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N7-16 64 700 137 4000K 14,106 103 B3-U0-G2 13,690 100 B2-U0-G2 13,350 98 B2-U0-G2 12,974 95 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-N3-16 80 350 87 4000K 10,214 117 B2-U0-G2 9,913 114 B2-U0-G2 9,667 111 B2-U0-G2 9,394 108 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-N5-16 80 530 127 4000K 14,453 114 B3-U0-G2 14,027 111 B2-U0-G2 13,679 108 B2-U0-G2 13,294 105 B4-U0-G2 LED Wattage and Lumen Values: Westbrook CXF14 / CXF15 (continued) 3000K Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Ordering Code Total LEDs LED Current (mA) Average System Watts 1 Color Temp. Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating CXFxx32-G2-W3-16 32 350 35 3000K 3,618 103 B1-U0-G1 3,511 100 B1-U0-G1 3,424 97 B1-U0-G1 3,395 96 B2-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-W5-16 32 530 51 3000K 5,119 100 B1-U0-G1 4,968 97 B1-U0-G1 4,845 95 B1-U0-G1 4,708 92 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-W7-16 32 700 71 3000K 6,712 95 B2-U0-G1 6,514 92 B1-U0-G1 6,352 90 B1-U0-G2 6,176 88 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-W3-16 48 350 52 3000K 5,245 102 B1-U0-G1 5,090 99 B1-U0-G1 4,964 96 B1-U0-G1 4,824 94 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-W5-16 48 530 75 3000K 7,422 99 B2-U0-G1 7,203 96 B1-U0-G2 7,025 94 B1-U0-G2 6,827 91 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-W7-16 48 700 103 3000K 9,732 94 B2-U0-G2 9,445 91 B2-U0-G2 9,210 89 B2-U0-G2 8,951 87 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-W3-16 64 350 68 3000K 6,652 98 B2-U0-G1 6,456 95 B1-U0-G1 6,296 92 B1-U0-G2 6,118 90 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx64-G2-W5-16 64 530 99 3000K 9,413 95 B2-U0-G2 9,136 92 B2-U0-G2 8,909 90 B2-U0-G2 8,658 87 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-W7-16 64 700 137 3000K 12,342 90 B2-U0-G2 11,978 88 B2-U0-G2 11,681 86 B2-U0-G2 11,352 83 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-W3-16 80 350 87 3000K 8,937 103 B2-U0-G2 8,673 100 B2-U0-G2 8,458 97 B2-U0-G2 8,220 94 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-W5-16 80 530 127 3000K 12,647 100 B2-U0-G2 12,274 97 B2-U0-G2 11,969 94 B2-U0-G2 11,632 92 B4-U0-G2 1. System input wattage may vary based on input voltage, by up to +/- 10% , and based on manufacturer forward voltage, by up to +/- 8%. 2. Lumen values based on photometric tests performed in compliance with IESNA LM-79. Note: Some data may be scaled based on tests of similar, but not identical, luminaires. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 4 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire Specifications: Housing In a round shape, this housing is constructed of low copper die-cast aluminum and 0.090" thick spun aluminum. All non-ferrous fasteners prevent corrosion and ensure longer life. Access-mechanism The hinged lens frame is cast aluminum with a stainless steel spring latch for tool-less access Mounting T:Top arm mount 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6A CXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4A CF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6ACXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4ACF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" Light engine LEDgine is composed of five main components: Heat Sink, Lens, LED lamp, Optical System, and Driver. Electrical components are RoHS compliant. LED module LED type Philips Lumileds LUXEON T.Composed of high-performance white LEDs. Color temperature as per ANSI/NEMA bin Neutral White, 4000 Kelvin nominal (3985K +/- 275K or 3710K to 4260K) or Warm White, 3000 Kelvin nominal (3045K +/- 175K or 2870K to 3220K), CRI 70 Min. 75 Typical. Heat sink Made of cast aluminum optimizing the LEDs efficiency and life. Product does not use any cooling device with moving parts (only passive cooling device). Finish Color in accordance with the AAMA 2603 standard. Application of polyester powder coat paint (4 mils/100 microns) with ± 1 mils / 24 microns of tolerance. The Thermosetting resins provides a discoloration resistant finish in accordance with the ASTM D2244 standard, as well as luster retention in keeping with the ASTM D523 standard and humidity proof in accordance with the ASTM D2247 standard. The surface treatment achieves a minimum of 2000 hours for salt spray resistant finish in accordance with testing performed and per ASTM B117 standard. Optical system (2) Type II, (3) Type III, (4) Type IV and (5) Type V are composed of high performance optical grade PMMA acrylic refractor lenses to achieve desired distribution optimized to get maximum spacing, target lumens and a superior lighting uniformity. Optical system is rated IP66. Performance shall be tested per LM 63, LM 79 and TM 15 (IESNA) certifying its photometric performance. Street side indicated. Driver Driver comes standard with dimming compatible 0-10V. High power factor of 95%. Electronic driver, operating range 50/60 Hz. Auto adjusting universal voltage input from 120 to 277 VAC rated for both application line to line or line to neutral, Class I, THD of 20% max. Maximum ambient operating temperature from 40°F (4°C) to 130°F (55°C). Certified in compliance to UL1310 cULus requirement (dry and damp location). Driver (continued) Assembled on a unitized removable tray with Tyco quick disconnect plug resisting to 221°F (105°C). The current supplying the LEDs will be reduced by the driver if the driver experiences internal overheating as a protection to the LEDs and the electrical components. Output is protected from short circuits, voltage overload and current overload. Automatic recovery after correction. Standard built in driver surge protection of 2.5kV (min). Driver options Optional programming 1 AST: Pre-set driver for progressive start-up of the LED module(s) to optimize energy management and enhance visual comfort at start-up. Optional programming 2 CLO: Pre-set driver to manage the lumen depreciation by adjusting the power given to the LEDs offering the same lighting intensity during the entire lifespan of the LED module. Optional programming 3 OTL: Pre-set driver to signal end of life of the LED module(s) for better fixture management. Dimming options DA: 4 Hrs 25% Reduction DB: 4 Hrs 50% Reduction DC: 4 Hrs 75% Reduction DD: 6 Hrs 25% Reduction DE: 6 Hrs 50% Reduction DF: 6 Hrs 75% Reduction DG: 8 Hrs 25% Reduction DH: 8 Hrs 50% Reduction DJ: 8 Hrs 75% Reduction DALI: Pre-set driver compatible with the DALI logarithmic control system. Surge protection Surge protector tested in accordance with ANSI/IEEE C62.45 per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2 Scenario I Category C High Exposure 10kV/10kA waveforms for Line Ground, Line Neutral and Neutral Ground, and in accordance with U.S. DOE (Department of Energy) MSSLC (Municipal Solid State Street Lighting Consortium) model specification for LED roadway luminaires electrical immunity requirements for High Test Level 10kV / 10kA. Luminaire options F:Fluted spinning 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6A CXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4A CF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" N:None CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 5 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire © 2016 Philips Lighting Holding B.V. All rights reserved. Philips reserves the right to make changes in specifications and/or to discontinue any product at any time without notice or obligation and will not be liable for any consequences resulting from the use of this publication. philips.com/luminaires Philips Lighting North America Corporation 200 Franklin Square Drive, Somerset, NJ 08873 Tel. 855-486-2216 Philips Lighting Canada Ltd. 281 Hillmount Rd, Markham, ON, Canada L6C 2S3 Tel. 800-668-9008 Specification (continued) Wiring Gauge 18 wires. Top mount option come with quick disconnects. Arm mount options provide a 6" Minimum exceeding from luminaire. Hardware All non-ferrous fasteners prevent corrosion and ensure longer life. Luminaire useful life Refer to IES files for energy consumption and delivered lumens for each option. Based on ISTMT in situ thermal testing in accordance with UL1598 and UL8750, using LM-80 data from LED manufacturers and engineering prediction methods, the luminaire useful life is expected to reach 100,000+ hours with >L70 lumen maintenance @ 25°C. (48 LED and 64 LED@700mA is 82,000) Luminaire useful life accounts for LED lumen maintenance and additional factors, including LED life, driver life, PCB substrate, solder joints on/off cycles and burning hours for nominal applications. LED products manufacturing standard The electronic components sensitive to electrostatic discharge (ESD) such as light emitting diodes (LEDs) are assembled in compliance with IEC61340 5 1 and ANSI/ ESD S20.20 standards so as to eliminate ESD events that could decrease the useful life of the product Quality control The manufacturer must provide a written confirmation of its ISO 9001 2008 and ISO 14001 2004 International Quality Standards Certification. Vibration resistance Meets the ANSI C136.31 2001, American National Standard for Roadway Luminaire Vibration specifications for normal Applications. Certifications and Compliance cETL listed to Canadian safety standards for wet locations. Manufactured to ISO 9001:2008 Standards. UL8750 and UL1598 compliant. ETL listed to U.S. safety standards for wet locations. cETL listed to Canadian safety standards for wet locations. LM80 & LM79 tested. IP Rating: The LED optics chamber is IP66 rated. The LED driver is IP66 rated. Westbrook LED luminaires are DesignLights Consortium qualified. Warranty 5 year extended warranty. Ordering Guide Example: HFH2310 P3 A Product Code HFH2310 Single Post diameter P3 3" Post Mount P4 4" Post Mount Finish A Black B White G Verde H Bronze I Gray J Green Specifications HOUSING: 356 HM high-strength, low-copper, proprietary cast aluminum alloy . FINISH: Thermoset polyester powdercoat is electrostatically applied after a five-stage conversion cleaning process and bonded by heat fusion thermosetting. Laboratory tested for superior weatherability and fade resistance in accordance with ASTM B117 specifications. For larger projects where a custom color is required, contact the factory for more information. MOUNTING: Cast Aluminum Hub mounts to a 3" OD x 3" long (P3) [if applicable] or 4" OD x 6 1/2" long (P4) [if applicable] tenon and is secured with at least (3) 5/16"-18 stainless steel set screws. CERTIFICATIONS: Manufactured to ISO 9001:2008 Standards. WARRANTY: Three-year limited warranty. Height : 17 1/4" (44 cm) Length: 21 1/4" (54 cm) EPA: 1.10 sq. ft. Single (HFH2310)Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 1 of 1 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2 Ordering Guide Example: P4131 12 A T D Product Code P4131 Pole Height 12 12' 14 14' 16 16' 18 18' Finish A Black B White G Verde H Bronze J Green Outlet Location (Optional) T 12" Down from Top - Aligned with House Side B 4" Up from Top of Base - Aligned with House Side Outlet Options (Optional) D Standard Duplex G GFI Duplex Specifications HOUSING: 356 HM high-strength, low-copper, proprietary cast aluminum alloy . 6005-T5 extruded aluminum. Anchor rods are hot dipped galvanized steel . FINISH: A durable polyurethane enamel finish is applied after assemblies are shot blasted to create a surface profile which allows for the highest level of paint adhesion. Laboratory tested for superior weatherability and fade resistance in accordance with ASTM B-117-64 and ANSI/ASTM G53-77 specifications. For larger projects where a custom color is required, contact the factory for more information. WARRANTY: Three-year limited warranty. OUTLET: Standard Duplex Outlet has universal metal weatherproof cover. Weatherproof while in use. Heavy-duty all-metal construction. Lockable security cover. Meets NEC 406.9 (B). Weather resistant. GFI Duplex Outlet has dual-function indicator light, universal metal weatherproof cover. Weatherproof while in use. Heavy-duty all-metal construction. Lockable security cover. Meets NEC 406.9 (B). Weather resistant. Tenon/Top: 4" OD Bolt Circle: 8" - 14" Anchor Rods: (4) 3/4" dia. x 19" Base Dimensions: 19" dia. x 54 1/2" Hand Hole : 6" x 11 1/2" Shaft: 4" Straight P4131 Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 1 of 2 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2 Wall Thickness: 0.125 Aluminum Height : 12', 14', 16', 18' Pole EPA Values Height Windspeed(mph)12' 14' 16' 18' 80 16.7400 10.9000 9.0700 7.5300 100 10.2600 6.4300 5.1300 4.0300 P4131 Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 2 of 2 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2 | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana TABLE OF CONTENTS Master Site Plan & Site Plan Phase 1 Application & Narrative 1. A1 2. MSP or SP 3. SP1 4. N1 5. N1 Address List 6. COB development review comments MSP or SP with applicant responses to each item Supporting Documents 7. Project Narrative – MSP or SP 8. Building Setback Deviation Narrative – MSP only 9. Building Setback Deviation Drawing – MSP only 10. Concurrent Construction Request – SP only 11. Sewer Capacity 12. Parking Calculations 13. Open space & Parkland Calculations 14. Signage Calculations & Comp Sign Plan 15. Storm Water Design Report, (Including Drywells) 16. Traffic Impact Study 17. Traffic Impact Study Addendum 18. Hydrant Pressure & Flow Test 19. CIL of Water Rights Calc & DNRC Letter 20. Access Easement & Zero Lot Agreement – signed 21. Easement for Access at Carwash – signed 22. Restriction of Transfer – MSP only 23. Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of SID o Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard o Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane Site Drawings 30. T1 Topographic Map 31. T1a Existing Utilities 32. C1.0 Civil Master Site Plan, Grading, Drainage & Utility 33. C1.1 Civil Phase 1 Site Plan Improvements – SP only 34. C2.0 Civil Grading & Drainage Plan 35. C3.0 Civil Detail Sheet 36. C4.0 Stormwater Details 37. L1.0 Landscape Plan 38. AC1.0 Architectural Master Site Plan 39. AC1.1 Phase 1 Site Plan 40. AC1.2 Construction Plan 41. Pole Light Photometrics 42. A1.0 Site Details (Bike Rack, Refuse, Benches & Planter) 43. A2.0 Main Level Plan 44. A2.1 Second Level Plan 45. Color Elevations 46. A3.0 Elevations 47. A3.1 Elevations 48. Roof Screen 49. Material Board 50. Lighting Cut Sheets 51. Retaining Wall Detail – MSP only A1 Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 1. PROJECT Development Name: Description: 2. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 3. APPLICANT Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 4. REPRESENTATIVE Name: Full Address: Phone: Email: 5. PROPERTY Full Street Address: Full Legal Description: Current Zoning: Current Use: Community Plan Designation: NORTHERN PACIFIC ADD, S07, T02 S, R06 E, - BLOCK 28, Lot 2C, PLAT C-23-A21, - Lot 10&11 - PLUS, N42' LOTS 22-23 50X260 PLUS ADJ STREETS & ALLEYS 101X260' - TRACT 25'X100' East Main Development Commercially develop existing vacant lot located along E Main St JBL LLC 1007 E Main St, Ste 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 406-587-1139 jl@locati.co Locati Architects - Laura Dornberger 1007 E Main St, Ste 202, Bozeman, MT 59715 406-587-1139 ldornberger@locatiarchitects.com Same As Applicant 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 See above B-2 Vacant + 5 residential units Community Commercial Mixed Use Bozeman Commons 1105 E Main Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 (Phase 1) Existing Lots associated with Dev. 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street, Bozeman MT 59715 Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16 Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications Overlay District: Neighborhood Conservation Entryway Corridor None Urban Renewal District: Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast None 6. STATISTICS (ONLY APPLICATION TYPES 2-12, 17, 24 AND 26) Gross Area: Acres: Square Feet: Net Area: Acres: Square Feet: Dwelling Units: Nonresidential Gross Building Square Feet: 7. APPLICATION TYPES Check all that apply, use noted forms. Form Form 1. Pre-application Consultation None 17. Informal Review INF 2. Master Site Plan MSP 18. Zoning Deviation None 3. Site Plan SP 19. Zoning or Subdivision Variance Z/SVAR 4. Subdivision pre-application PA 20. Conditional Use Permit CUP 5. Subdivision preliminary plat PP 21. Special Temporary Use Permit STUP 6. Subdivision final plat FP 22. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP 7. Subdivision exemption SE 23. Regulated Activities in Wetlands RW 8. Condominium Review CR 24. Zone Map Amendment (non Annexation) ZMA 9. PUD concept plan PUDC 25. UDC Text Amendment ZTA 10. PUD preliminary plan PUDP 26. Growth Policy Amendment GPA 11. PUD final plan PUDFP 27. Modification/Plan Amendment MOD 12. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX 28. Extension of Approved Plan EXT 13. Administrative Interpretation Appeal AIA 29. Reasonable Accommodation RA 14. Administrative Project Decision Appeal APA 30. Other: 15. Commercial Nonresidential COA CCOA 1 6. Historic Neighborhood Conservation Overlay COA NCOA 8. APPLICATION FEES AND MATERIALS A. Fees are to be provided based upon the adopted fee schedule FS. Contact our office for an estimate. 5 to be demolished 17,147 sf phase 1 4.29 186,855 4.29 186,855 SP Site Plan Required Materials SP Page 1 of 1 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP1, N1 Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications SITE PLAN REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS 3 total sets are required that include 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets. Complete and signed development review application form A1. Plan sets that include all required items listed on the site plan checklist form SP1. If demolition, checklist items in form DEM Standard application sets required plan sizes: 2 sets that include full size 24 x 36 inch plans 1 set that include 11 x 17 inch plans 2-digital versions of all materials (JPEG or PDF) on separate CD-ROMs or USB drives. Individual files must be provided at 5MB or less in size. Files shall be named according to naming protocol. Notes: All plans must be drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8½ x 11 inches or larger than 24 x 36 inches. The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used, they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Plans that are rolled or not bound into sets will not be accepted. NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1 and materials. APPLICATION FEE Base fee $2,100 If includes dwellings add: $115 per dwelling unit If includes nonresidential uses add: $542 per 1000 square feet of nonresidential gross building area up to 30,000 square feet. $255 per 1000 square feet of non residential gross building area over initial 30,000 square feet unless proposed building is four or more stories. If the proposed building is four or more stories in height, use $102 per 1000 square feet of nonresidential gross building area over initial 30,000 square feet. If deviation add: $215 per deviation Application types and fees are cumulative. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net SP1 Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 1 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SITE PLAN CHECKLIST DESIGN REVIEW BOARD THRESHOLDS Must be A plus one or more of B-F in order to require Board review. Yes No A. Project location is within an Overlay District? B. 20 or more dwelling units in a multiple household structure or structures? C. 30,000 or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space, service commercial space or industrial space? D. 20,000 or more square feet of exterior storage of materials or goods? E. Parking for more than 90 vehicles? F. Large scale retail per Section 38.22.180 BMC? GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Name of project/development. 2. Name and mailing address of developer and owner. 3. Name and mailing address of engineer, architect, landscape architect, planner, etc. 4. Location of project/development by street address/legal description. 5. Location/vicinity map, including area within one-half mile of the site. 6. A construction route map showing how materials and heavy equipment will travel to and from the site. SITE PLAN GENERAL 7. Boundary line of property with dimensions. 8. Date of plan preparation and changes. 9. North point indicator. 10. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. 11. Parcel size(s) in gross acres and square feet. 12. Estimated total floor area and estimated ratio of floor area to lot size (floor area ratio, FAR), with a breakdown by land use. 13. Location, percentage of parcel(s) and total site, and square footage of the following: a. Existing and proposed buildings and structures. b. Driveway circulation and parking areas. c. Landscaped areas. d. Private open space, provide boundary/ies and dimensions (if residential requirement). e. City Parks. f. Other public lands (school sites, public access greenway corridors, trail corridors). 14. Total number, type and density per type of dwelling units, and total new and gross residential density and density per residential parcel. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 2 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SITE PLAN DETAILS The location, identification and dimensions of the following existing and proposed data, onsite and to a distance of 100 feet (200 feet for PUD’s) outside the site boundary, exclusive of public rights -of-way unless otherwise stated. 15. Topographic contours at a minimum interval of 2 feet, or as determined by the Director. 16. Location of City limit boundaries, and boundaries of Gallatin County’s Bozeman Area Zoning Jurisdiction, within or near the development. 17. Existing zoning within 200 feet of the site. 18. Adjacent streets and street rights-of-way to a distance of 150 feet, except for sites adjacent to major arterial streets where the distances shall be 200 feet. 19. On site streets and rights of way. 20. Ingress and egress points. 21. Traffic flow on site. 22. Traffic flow off site. 23. All parking facilities, including circulation aisles, access drives, covered and uncovered bicycle parking, compact spaces, ADA accessible spaces and motorcycle parking, on -street parking, number of employee and non-employee parking spaces, existing and proposed, and total square footage of each. 24. Utilities and utility rights of way and easements, including: a. Electric. b. Natural gas. c. Telephone, cable and similar utilities. d. Water. e. Sewer (sanitary, treated effluent and storm). 25. Surface water, including: a. Ponds, streams and irrigation ditches (include classifications be based upon a determination of the Gallatin Conservation District; note classification of each feature on plans). b Watercourses, water bodies and wetlands (include classifications based upon a determination of the Gallatin Conservation District, Army Corps of Engineers, or Wetland Delineation Report; note classification of each feature on plans). c. Floodplains as designated on the Federal Insurance Rate Map or that may otherwise be identified as lying within a 100 year floodplain through additional floodplain delineation, engineering analysis, topographic survey or other objective and factual basis. d. A floodplain analysis report in compliance with Article. 26. Grading and drainage plan, including provisions for on-site retention/detention and water quality improvement facilities as required by the Engineering Department, or in compliance with B.M.C. Section 14 storm drainage ordinance and best management pr actices manual adopted by the City. 27. All drainageways, streets, arroyos, dry gullies, diversion ditches, spillways, reservoirs, etc. which may be incorporated into the storm drainage system for the property shall be designated: a. The name of the drainageway (where appropriate). b. The downstream conditions (developed available drainageways, etc.). c. Any downstream restrictions. 28. Significant rock outcroppings, slopes of greater than 15 percent or other significant topographic features. 29. Sidewalks, walkways, driveways, loading areas and docks, bikeways, including typical details and interrelationships with vehicular circulation system, indicating proposed treatment of points of Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 3 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: conflict. 30. Provision for handicapped accessibility, including but not limited to, wheelchair ramps, parking spaces, handrails and curb cuts, including construction details and the applicant’s certification of ADA compliance. 31. Fences and walls, including typical details. 32. Permanent and construction period exterior refuse collection areas, including typical details. 33. Curb, asphalt section and drive approach construction details. 34. Location and extent of snow storage areas. 35. Location and extent of street vision triangles. 36. Unique natural features, significant wildlife areas and vegetative cover, including existing trees and shrubs having a diameter greater than 2.5 inches, by species. 37. Historic, cultural and archeological resources, describe and map any designated historic structures or districts, and archeological or cultural sites. 38. Major public facilities, including schools, parks, trails, etc. PARKLAND AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING 39. If residential, provide the required parkland for the development, including calculations per Chapter 38, Article 27 BMC (Park and Recreation Requirements). Source and amount of parkland credit to be used if previously provided. If parkland is proposed a park plan shall be submitted consistent with Section 38.41.060.A.16 BMC. 40. Describe how the site plan will satisfy any requirements of Section 17.02, BMC (Affordable Housing) which have either been established for that lot(s) through the subdivision process or if no subdivision has previously occurred are applicable to a site plan. The description shall be of adequate detail to clearly identify those lots and dwellings designated as subject to Title 17, Chapter 2, BMC compliance requirements and to make the obligations placed on the affected lots and dwellings readily understandable. LIGHTING DETAILS 41. Lighting plan and electrical site plan, complete with all structures, parking spaces, building entrances, traffic areas (both vehicular and pedestrian), vegetation that might interfere with lighting, and adjacent uses, containing a layout of all proposed fixtures by location and type. 42. A photometric lighting plan that contains a layout of all proposed fixtures by location and type and extends the photometric information to the property boundaries and rights of way. For fueling canopies a second photometric plan is required to specifically analyze the light output underneath the drip line of the fuel canopy. 43. Cut sheets for all proposed exterior fixtures that are keyed to the fixtures noted in the lighting electrical plan and the photometric lighting plan. BUILDING DESIGN AND SIGNAGE 44. Front, rear and side elevations of all buildings, structures, fences and walls with height dimensions and roof pitches. Show open stairways and other projections from exterior building wall. Building elevations shall include proposed exterior building materials, windows and doors including a color and material palette for all proposed features keyed to the building elevations. 45. Provide elevations and details of all ground mounted and rooftop mechanical screening. 46. Exterior signs if applicable. Include building frontage dimension(s) and maximum sign area calculation, provide sign dimensions and square footage of each. Note – The review of signs in conjunction with this application is only review for sign area compliance with Chapter 38, Article 28 BMC (Signs). A sign permit must be obtained from the Building Division prior to erection of any and all signs, addition design guidelines apply for signs within zoning Overlay Districts. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 4 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: LANDSCAPE PLAN A separate landscape plan shall be submitted as part of the site plan application unless the required landscape information can be included in a clear and uncluttered manner on a site plan with a scale where one inch equals 20 feet. 47. Project name, street address, and lot and block description. 48. Date, scale, north arrow, and the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of both the property owner and the person preparing the plan. Plan preparer shall be a state registered landscape architect; an individual with a degree in landscape design and two years of professional design experience in the state; or an individual with a degree in a related field (horticulture, botany, plant science, etc.) and at least five years of professional landscape design experience, of which two years have been in the state. 49. Location of existing boundary lines and dimensions of the lot. 50. Existing and proposed grade that complies with maximum allowable slope and grade. 51. Approximate centerlines of existing watercourses, required watercourse setbacks, and the location of any 100-year floodplain; the approximate location of significant drainage features; and the location and size of existing and proposed streets and alleys, utility easements, utility lines, driveways and sidewalks on the lot and/or adjacent to the lot. 52. Location of all pavement, curbs, sidewalks and gutters. 53. Show location of existing and/or proposed drainage facilities which are to be used for drainage control including proposed landscaping and seeding as required by Section 38.23.080.H BMC 54. Location and extent of snow storage areas. 55. Location and extent of street vision triangles. 56. Complete landscape legend providing a description of plant materials shown on the plan, including typical symbols, names (common and botanical name), locations, quantities, container or caliper sizes at installation, heights, spread and spacing and identification of drought tolerant and/or native and adapted species. The location and type of all existing trees on the lot over 6 inches in caliper must be specifically indicated. 57. Size of planting at the time of installation and at maturity. 58. Complete illustration of landscaping and screening to be provided in or near off-street parking and loading areas, including information as to the amount (in square feet) of landscape area to be provided internal to parking areas and the number and location of required off -street parking and loading spaces. 59. Street frontage landscaping. 60. Locations and dimensions of proposed landscape buffer strips, including watercourse buffer zones demonstrating compliance with watercourse setback planting plan requirements per Section 38.23.100 BMC unless previously provided during subdivision review. 61. Location, height and material of proposed landscape screening and fencing (with berms to be delineated by one foot contours). 62. An indication of how existing healthy trees (if any) are to be retained and protected from damage during construction. 63. Size, height, location and material of proposed seating, lighting, planters, sculptures, and water features. 64. A description of proposed watering methods including any use of high efficiency irrigation technologies and best practice, source of irrigation water and estimated amount of water consumption broken down by vegetation type (e.g. turf, shrubs, trees) and total estimated water consumption. 65. Areas to be irrigated and type of proposed irrigation and the irrigation system design plan. Site Plan Checklist SP1 Page 5 of 5 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, SP, N1, DEM (if demolition) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: 66. Tabulation of performance points earned by the plan per Section 38.26.060 BMC. STREETS AND TRAFFIC 67. Street, traffic, and access information required in Section 38.41.060.A.12 unless previously provided through a subdivision review process or that the requirement is waived in writing by the Engineering Department prior to application submittal. OTHER PERMITS 68. Stormwater management permit and fee to Engineering Department. DEVIATIONS If the proposal includes a request for a deviation as outlined in Section 38.35.050 BMC the application shall be accompanied by written and graphic material sufficient to illustrate the conditions that the modified standards will produce. 69. Either through the site plan requirement above or separate exhibit clearly show any proposed deviations related to site requirements such as yards/setbacks, lot coverage, parking or other applicable standards. 70. Either through the building elevation requirement above or separate exhibit clearly show any proposed deviations related to building construction such as height, second story additions, or other applicable standards. 71. For deviations in the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay a deviation narrative shall be provided stating which Section (s) of the Bozeman Municipal Code are proposed for deviation, to what extent and include a response to the following: a. How the modification is more historically appropriate for the building and site in question and the adjacent properties, as determined in Section 38.16.050 BMC than would be achieved under a literal enforcement of this chapter (Chapter 38, BMC); b. How the modifications will have minimal adverse effect on abutting properties or the per mitted uses thereof; and c. How the modifications will assure the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare. d. How the requested deviation will encourage restoration and rehabilitation activity that will contribute to the overall historic character of the community. If more than one deviation a response to the criteria shall be provided for each deviation. 72. For deviations in the Entryway Corridor Overlay a deviation narrative shall be provided stating which Section (s) of the Bozeman Municipal Code are proposed for deviation, to what extent and include a response to the following: a. How the deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to that produced by the existing standards; b. How the deviation will be consistent with the intent and purpose of the article (Article 17, Chapter 38 BMC);and c. How the deviation will be consistent with the adopted design objectives (City of Bozeman Design Objectives Plan, 2005) for the particular entryway corridor If more than one deviation, a response to the criteria shall be provided for each deviation. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net N1 Noticing Materials Page 1 of 1 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: N1 Recommended Forms: Required Forms: NOTICING MATERIALS Notice is required for certain projects in order for citizens to participate in decision making which affects their interests and provides opportunity to receive information pertinent to an application that would not otherwise be available to the decision maker. SITE PLAN, MASTER SITE PLAN, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE, DEVIATION, FIRST MINOR SUBDIVISON AND SIMILAR REQUIRED NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site, attached to this checklist. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the adjoining property owners. MAJOR AND SUBSEQUENT MINOR SUBDIVISION REQUIRED NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners within 200 feet of the project site and not physically contiguous (touching a boundary) to the subdivision, attached to this checklist. Clearly label list ADJOINER NOT CONTIGUOUS. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the adjoining property owners. Legible list of full names and addresses of all property owners physically contiguous (touching a boundary) including recorded purchasers under contract for deed to be sent certified mail attached to this checklist. Clearly label list CONTIGUOUS. Stamped, unsealed, plain (no return address) #10 envelopes preaddressed with the names and addresses of the physically contiguous property owners including recorded purchasers under contract for deed. Two sets additional mailing labels with the names and addresses of the physically contiguous property owners including recorded purchasers under contract for deed attached. NOTICE Current property owners of record can be found at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office in the Gallatin County Courthouse 311 West Main Street Bozeman, Montana. CERTIFICATION I, _____________________________________________, hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the attached name and address list of all adjoining property owners (including all condominium owners, within 200 feet of the property located at ________________________________________________________, is a true and accurate list from the last declared Gallatin County tax records. I further understand that an inaccurate list may delay review of the project. _______________________________________ Signature CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771 phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net Laura Dornberger 1107, 1113, 1117 E Main Street 4 4 4 TO: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE FROM: REBECCA OWENS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER SHAWN KOHTZ, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEER RE: EAST MAIN SITE PLAN APPLICATION 17041 DATE: FEBRUARY 22, 2017 Project Description: A Site Plan with COA application for Phase 1 of the Locati East Main Master Site Plan development to allow construction of a 2‐story office building of approximately 17,000 sq. ft. with 59 parking spaces, circulation and related improvements to the site immediately east of the existing 1019 East Main Street structure. Recommendation: Staff has found that the project does not comply with the requirements of Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code and is deeming the application inadequate for further review. Code corrections must be satisfied prior to a recommendation for approval. Planning Division, Rebecca Owens, rowens@bozeman.net, 582‐2297 Section 2 ‐ RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. These conditions are specific to the development. 1. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. Section 3 – REQUIRED CODE CORRECTIONS All references are to the Bozeman Municipal Code. 1. The application requests concurrent construction of main extensions, as submitted in writing via the Site Plan Phase 1 project narrative. Please refer to Engineering comments below. 2. Section 38.23.150, BMC ‐ Lighting. a. Photometrics. Section 38.23.150 and SP1 checklist items 41‐42 requires a photometric lighting plan. Provide a photometric plan that includes the proposed locations and foot candle projections for all site fixtures and all wall‐mounted lights for Building 1, based on the cutsheets/specs provided in the plan submittal. Update cutsheets to add a numbering or lettering key that corresponds with a photometric plan key (i.e., products A, B, C, etc.). D.7.e of this section states that all outdoor lighting must be designed and located such that the maximum illumination measured in foot candles at the property line shall not exceed a 1.0 onto adjacent commercial properties and public rights of ways. Also refer to Figure 38.42.1620 regarding the minimization of light trespass. See AC1.0, for all exterior lighting photometric, fixtures L1‐L3. There is a legend on the bottom right side of the sheet and arcs shown around fixtures which depict 1fc. Additionally, we have submitted a pole fixture photometrics sheet. b. Cutoff fixtures. Please note luminaire (light fixture) shielding and cutoff requirements for outdoor site lighting per Sec. 38.23.150.D.7.b and 7.f, and for all lighting in general, per 38.23.150.F.1.c. The proposed lighting meets preferred specifications for LED lighting. However, please note that in terms of cutoff and shielding requirements, it appears that at least one of the selected products utilizes a non‐conforming distribution and is not full cutoff (i.e., the bulb is visible below the shield). This indicates that it is not full cutoff, as required by code (also, as a note for future reference, the City’s forthcoming update to street lighting and pedestrian walkway standards allows for zero Uplight, U‐0). Please identify a compliant alternative product and submit an amended cutsheet set demonstrating the switch. Fixture proposed is available without the globe. See photo on Material Board of fixture already installed without globe on existing building adjacent to the proposed Phase 1 building. Additionally, we are installing an LED version of this fixture which will not have a round bulb as see in photo but a flat lens. c. Site lighting. It is unclear from the cutsheets provided which fixture product is intended for site pole‐mounted lighting. Provide a site fixture cutsheet and/or identify which existing product is intended for site use. Site lighting must be the same as or compatible with existing fixture styles in the master plan for the development and Locati development to the west in terms of consistent design, lighting quality, distribution, and height. Note that any lighting used to illuminate an off‐street parking area shall comply with the lighting standards of Sec.38.23.150. See cutsheet for L3 fixture. L3 fixtures are labled on AC1.0 drawing and the newly provided photometric sheet for pole light fixtures. This fixture is very similar size, shape and lighting output to the fixture that has been used on the adjacent parking areas. The fixture previously used has been discontinued. d. Other security lighting. While not depicted on the plan, if applied, on‐ site lighting is encouraged for use in pedestrian circulation areas as a security amenity and in accent architectural elements, landscaping or wayfinding (e.g., bollards) but not to illuminate entire portions of buildings per Section 38.23.150.D.7.g. Permitted lighting fixture styles are depicted under Chapter 38, Appendix A, Illustrations, Figure 38.23.150. See building mounted fixture L2 on AC1.0 which is used for security lighting. 3. Section 38.26.050.C.2.e(3) Parking lot landscaping. The minimum width and/or length of any parking lot landscaped area (i.e., landscaped internal sidewalk connection, island or bump‐out) shall be eight feet. Please update parking lot landscaping where this requirement is not demonstrated. Parking lot landscape areas have been updated to meet the requirements. 4. Irrigation wells are proposed. A copy of the approved DEQ permit for the on‐site irrigation well must be provided prior to the issuance of the first occupancy permit. Noted. See letter provided by DNRC. 5. Section 38.41.080.j Site plan submittal requirements. Building design information (on‐site) (3) Floor plans depicting location and dimensions of all proposed uses and activities. The floor plans must be updated to identify exterior wall dimensions, at minimum. Floor Plans have been updated. Advisory 6. Section 38.23.170.A.1 Trash and garbage enclosures. Trash enclosures shall be situated so that containers can be pulled straight out of the enclosure or so the solid waste truck can back straight into it. The location of all trash enclosures shall be subject to review and approval by the city's solid waste division. As an advisory comment, please ensure that the location of temporary stormwater ponds do not conflict with the trash pad location proposed for Phase 1. It is intended that only for Phase 1 the garbage truck will have to back out of the parking area after unloading the receptacle. Thus there is no conflict with storm water pond. 7. Section 38.17.050 Certificate of appropriateness. The subject site is located in the East Main Class 2 Entryway Corridor Overlay District. Per Chapter 38, Article 17, the plan must undergo Administrative Design Review (ADR) evaluation with Certificate of Appropriateness approval that is independent of the DRC to ensure comprehensive address of design quality according requirements in the Bozeman Design Objectives Plan. The ADR process is concurrent with the site plan review. ADR determination will be incorporated with the final application decision documents (i.e., staff report to the Director of Community Development). Noted. 8. Section 38.17.050 Certificate of appropriateness. No building, demolition, sign, conditional use permit or moving permit shall be issued within an entryway corridor until a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the appropriate review authority and until final action on the proposal has been taken. A Demolition COA application must be provided with or independent of the subject project application if the demolition is proposed in Phase 1 and ahead of building permits for Phases 2 and 3. One permit is required per existing building address. We will submit a Demolition COA for each of the existing buildings. 9. Section 38.39.030.C, BMC Improvements and guarantees. This section details completion of improvements for site development. Any improvements for Phase 1 not installed at time of occupancy for Building 1 shall be the subject of a financial guarantee and improvements agreement. The City may restrict what items may be financially guaranteed and withhold occupancy to protect the public health and safety. Noted. 10. The application includes estimates for the development’s sign plan, including building frontage dimensions and maximum sign area requirements as compare to proposed sign dimensions and area. The draft calculations and sign styles appear to meet code and East Main Entryway Corridor Overlay District requirements. This information and the associated request for signage plan approval must be submitted to Community Development via a separate signage permit application. Please consult with planning technician staff. Noted. Engineering Department Comments, Shawn Kohtz, P.E., skohtz@bozeman.net, 582‐2288 Code Corrections 1. BMC Section 38.24.010.A.8 states: To facilitate traffic movement, the provision of emergency services and the placement of utility easements, all developments shall be provided with a second means of access. The applicant must provide a secondary access for provision of emergency services given the intensified use on this site. A secondary access must be provided in Phase I. Secondary access will be provided with Phase 1. The location of the access has been revised. See current drawings. 2. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.24.090.D.3 states: These standards apply to the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and intersections, and the minimum distance between public and/or private accesses and other public and/or private accesses. 1. The proposed drive access onto E. Main Street does not meet the requirement of this code section. The applicant must obtain Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) approval for the proposed drive access. If MDT grants approval of the proposed access, the applicant must align the access with the drive access across E. Main Street and provide justification for a deviation from the access separation standards per BMC 38.24.090.H.3. Also, if MDT grants the access, all MDT requirements for the access must be met prior to site plan approval. Access has been relocated to the existing property access at the carwash. See TIS addendum for traffic information. 3. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section 38.24.060.B.4 states: All arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. A development shall be approved only if the LOS requirements are met in the design year, which shall be a minimum of 15 years following the development application review or construction of mitigation measures if mitigation measures are required to maintain LOS. Intersections shall have a minimum acceptable LOS of "C" for the intersection as a whole. BMC Section 38.24.060.4.b states an exception: The review authority may grant a waiver from a LOS of less than "C" at a specific intersection if the review authority determines: (1) Granting of a waiver from the level of service for the intersection would not be contrary to public health and safety and is in the public interest; (2) Improvements to the intersection to raise the overall level of service to a "C" or better are currently scheduled for commencement of construction within three years as shown on the most recently adopted transportation capital improvement plan; (3) All right‐of‐way necessary for the required intersection improvements have been obtained by the city or by the Montana Department of Transportation; and (4) The commission has approved a financing plan for the intersection improvements. The intersection of Highland and Main must be upgraded prior to site plan approval. Alternatively, the applicant must obtain a waiver prior to site plan approval per BMC Section 38.24.060.4.b. Noted. It was discussed with our planner that the waiver will be required prior to the issue of a building permit. Please confirm this is accurate. 4. BMC Section 38.24.080 states: City standard sidewalks (including a concrete sidewalk section through all private drive approaches) shall be constructed in all developments on all public and private street frontages, except for alleys. The requirements of the city design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications shall apply. The applicant must construct City Standard sidewalk along the entire property frontage of E. Main Street, and the applicant must indicate sidewalk construction on the plans prior to site plan approval. A sidewalk that meets city standards along the entire property frontage of E Main St will be constructed with Phase 1. The landscaping and boulevard trees will NOT be installed with Phase 1 but with subsequent adjacent building phases. 5. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section 38.23.030.A states: The developer shall install complete drainage facilities in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality and the city, and shall conform to any applicable facilities plan and the terms of any approved site specific stormwater control plan. The city's requirements are contained in the design standards and specifications policy and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications, and by this reference these standards are incorporated into and made a part of these regulations.  The applicant must provide stormwater retention calculations for the proposed drywells #1A and #1B and indicate construction of the drywells on the plans prior to site plan approval. Drywell calculations have been provided and location shown on the plans.  The applicant must provide the volume of the temporary detention/retention ponds at the proposed phase line and demonstrate consistency of those volumes with the stormwater design report calculations prior to site plan approval. The temporary ponds must be constructed to the standards of a permanent stormwater pond. The applicant must provide details of pond construction consistent with the City standard requirements prior to site plan approval. Volumes for the phase 1 retention ponds are consistent with design report that has been provided. Details of the ponds have been provided. 6. BMC Section 38.23.060.C.1 states: A public utility easement shall be granted for all public utility mains not located within public street right‐of‐way.  The applicant must provide a minimum 30‐foot wide easement for the proposed water main extended into the project site. The easement must be provided on the City Standard form and executed and delivered to the City Engineering Department (Shawn Kohtz) prior to site plan approval.  The applicant must provide a minimum 30‐foot wide easement for the existing sanitary sewer mains and manholes on the project site. The easement must be provided on the City Standard form and executed and delivered to the City Engineering Department (Shawn Kohtz) prior to site plan approval. Easements have been provided see included documents. 7. BMC 38.23.070.A.1 states: The developer shall install complete municipal water and sanitary sewer system facilities, or a system allowed by 38.21.030.D, and may be required by the city to install municipal storm sewer system facilities. These systems shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of the state department of environmental quality and the city, and shall conform with any applicable facilities plan. The city's requirements are contained in the Design Standards and Specifications Policy and the City of Bozeman Modifications to Montana Public Works Standard Specifications, and by this reference these standards are incorporated into and made a part of these regulations. The developer shall submit plans and specifications for the proposed facilities to the city and to the state department of environmental quality and shall obtain their approvals prior to commencing construction of any municipal water, sanitary sewer or storm sewer system facilities.  The applicant must obtain approval from the City Water and Sewer Superintendent for the proposed non‐standard sanitary sewer and water service configurations. Service configurations have been revised to meet standard service configurations.  No sanitary sewer services or water services may be installed within 10‐feet of a tree or significant landscape feature. Noted. 8. BMC Section 38.23.180 states: the transfer of water rights or the payment of cash‐in‐lieu (CIL) of water rights shall be provided. The applicant must contact Brian Heaston with the City Engineering Department for an analysis of CIL of water rights and pay CIL of water rights due prior to site plan approval. Noted. CIL of water rights calculations have been provided. In addition, an exempt well for irrigation is planned for the use of the entire development landscaping needs. We included a letter from Kari Strasheim, DNRC Water Resources, for a letter confirming the landscaping/irrigation system falls within the requirements for an exempt well. 9. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section 38.23.060.A states: Where determined to be necessary, public and/or private easements shall be provided for private and public utilities, drainage, vehicular or pedestrian access, etc. The applicant must execute and file with the County Clerk and Recorder the proposed mutual access easement prior to site plan approval. The applicant must provide a copy of the filed document prior to site plan approval. Noted. New Access Easement and Zero Lot Agreement included. Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Highland Boulevard b) Intersection improvements to E. Main Street and Haggerty Lane The document filed shall specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The SID waiver must be filed and a copy provided to the City prior to site plan approval. Waivers have been included. 2. The applicant must provide temporary barricades at phase terminations where a drive aisle or parking area is intended to be extended in a future phase and does not terminate with curb and gutter to keep vehicle traffic on pavement. All paved areas are terminated with a rollover curb or similar. These areas are limited and this method had proven to work on other developments phased construction. 3. The applicant must adjust the Handicap ramp detail 3/C3.0 to comply with ADA requirements. Detail has been modified to comply. Advisory Comments 1. The applicant must submit plans and specifications for water and sewer main extensions, streets, and storm water improvements, prepared and signed by a professional engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana, which must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans must also be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant must also provide professional engineering services for construction inspection, post‐construction certification, and preparation of mylar record drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted. Noted. Building permits will not be issued prior to City acceptance of the site infrastructure improvements unless all provisions set forth in Section 38.39.030.C of the Bozeman Municipal Code are met to allow for concurrent construction. See concurrent construction request. 2. The applicant must prepare plans and specifications for any fire service line in accordance with the City’s Fire Service Line Policy. The plans must be prepared by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system. The applicant must also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection, post‐construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and domestic services 4” or larger, must be a standalone submittal, separate from the FSP. City of Bozeman applications for service must be completed by the applicant. Noted. 3. The applicant must contact the Gallatin County Conservation District, Montana Department of Environmental Quality, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, Turbidity exemption, etc.) must be obtained by the applicant and provided prior to final plat approval. Noted. Other Department Contacts and Comments (if provided) 1. Building Division; Bob Risk brisk@bozeman.net 406‐582‐2377 2. Parks and Recreation; Carolyn Poissant; cpoissant@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐2908 3. Sustainability Division; Natalie Meyer nmeyer@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2317 4. Solid Waste Division; Kevin Handelin khandelin@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐3238 The Solid Waste Division approves location and design of the proposed refuse enclosure plan for the East Main Development phase 1 site plan, 17041. 5. Water Conservation; Jessica Ahlstrom jahlstrom@bozeman.net 406‐ 582‐2265 6. Stormwater Division; Kyle Mehrens jkmehrens@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2270 7. Fire Department; Trisha Wolford twolford@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 2353 The Fire Department is not supportive of the proposed design as relates to waiting for Phase 2 of the project to build the second drive access. A second access for ingress and egress, in addition to the existing access from the southwestern corner of the site to East Main Street, will be required for the Phase 1 site development. This is a standard safety and welfare concern for master planned developments with phasing, as each site phase needs to be fully functional on its own in the case that future phases are stalled. An access from the existing drive area in the southeast corner of the site, for example, would be an appropriate alternative. Secondary access will be provided with Phase 1. 8. Water and Sewer Division; John Alston jalston@bozeman.net 406‐582‐ 3200 Refer to the DRC meeting of 2/22/17. The hydrant line closest to the central plaza must be shortened. 9. Forestry Division; City Forester; vgalli@bozeman.net 406‐582‐3205 10. NorthWestern Energy; Dustin Workman; dustin.workman@northwestern.com Refer to the DRC meeting of 2/22/17. Contact NWE to ensure site plan and associated master site plan requirements are addressed. We have met with Dustin to configure NWE & communication utilities. We are proposing to remove all overhead power lines and burry them. No easements are required because services will be contained on a single lot. Future Impact Fees ‐ Please note that future building permit applications will require payment of the required transportation, water, sewer and fire impact fees according to the City of Bozeman adopted impact fee schedule in place at the time of building permit issuance. If you desire an estimate of the required impact fees according to current rates please contact the Department of Community Development and/or visit www.bozeman.net. Note: During preparation of the staff report for future applications, additional conditions of approval may be recommended based on comments and recommendations provided by other applicable review agencies involved with the review of the project. Project Narrative     Page | 1     |BOZEMAN COMMONS – PHASE 1| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana SITE PLAN PHASE 1 PROJECT NARRATIVE The Bozeman Commons - Phase 1 consists of a new 17,000 sf office building to the east of the existing Mountain View office building (1019 E. Main St.). It includes on-site parking, which will be integrated with the existing parking on the adjacent lots to the west. Ingress and Egress for Phase 1 will be the use of the existing access from main street. Affordable Housing – This site plan does not incorporate any affordable housing Concurrent Construction - Development would like to request concurrent construction of main extensions. Sewer Capacity - We propose demolition of 5 existing residences on the site to provide sanitary sewer capacity as addressed in the master site plan concept review. Plumbing calculations included. Page | 1     | EAST MAIN DEVELOPMENT | East Main Street Bozeman, Montana CONCURRENT CONSTRUCTION REQUESTED 38.39.030 C Completion time for site development. Whenever any building lots and/or building sites are created inside the city limits, and prior to the issuance of any building permits on such lots or sites, municipal water distribution systems, and municipal sanitary sewer collection systems, and streets shall be provided to the site. Each building site must utilize and be connected to both the municipal water distribution and municipal sanitary sewer collection systems. Subject to the provisions of subsection C.1 of this section, these improvements shall be designed, constructed and installed according to the standards and criteria as adopted by the city and approved by the review authority prior to the issuance of any building permits. 1. Provision of municipal central water distribution, municipal sanitary sewer collection systems, and streets means that the criteria in either subsection a or subsections b and c are met: a. Water, sewer and street services are installed and accepted by the city with service stubs being extended into the site, with such stubs being of adequate size to provide water and sewer service to the proposed development without modification to publicly owned infrastructure; or b. The water mains, sewer mains and streets to be extended to provide service to the development are: located within a publicly dedicated right-of-way or easement; Correct; constructed to city standards; Correct; are physically adjacent to the site proposed for construction; Correct; are installed and accepted by the city; Notes; and are adequate in capacity to provide necessary service to the proposed development; Correct; and comply with the requirements of this subsection C.1.b and subsection C.1.c of this section; c. Water mains, sewer mains and streets shall meet the following requirements: (1) Any required on-site extensions of water mains, sewer mains or streets to be dedicated to the public shall be located entirely within publicly held easements or rights-of-way; Easement has been drafted to meet city standards; shall serve only a single lot; The main extension is only serving a single lot; are the subject of an irrevocable offer of dedication to the city upon completion of the project; Correct; the development is under the control of a single developer who shall retain control of the entire project until final completion; Correct, Bridger View Development; all work is under the supervision of a single general contractor; Correct, Dick Anderson Construction is the general contractor; and no subdivision of land is involved; Correct. (2) The DRC shall determine when the standards of this subsection C.1 are met. Noted.The fire department must consider whether adequate fire protection services are available from existing hydrants, and water supply exists to meet needs during construction. Noted. If adequate fire protection does not exist then concurrent infrastructure and building construction may only occur under the provisions of subsection C.1.c.(3) of this section. Based on evaluation by the fire department, simultaneous construction of infrastructure to be Page | 2     dedicated to the public and private construction may be permitted only within a defined portion of the site; (3) Approval of the final engineering design, including location and grade, for the infrastructure project must be obtained from the engineering department, Noted. and the state department of environmental quality when applicable, Noted. prior to issuance of any building permit for the development; and (4) No occupancy, either temporary or final, may be issued until all on-site and offsite water, sewer and street or drive improvements are installed and accepted or approved as applicable by the city. Noted.   1107 East Main Page 1     October 3, 2016 Shawn Kohtz, PE City of Bozeman Engineering Department RE: 1107 East Main Sewer Capacity Shawn, Laura Dornberger with Locati Architects and Mark Esponda with Dick Anderson Construction have asked us to review the documentation and requirements for the existing waste water system at 1107 East Main, Bozeman, MT. It is our understanding that the property is to be developed, but that the existing sewer service currently does not have the capacity for the new development in addition to the existing structures on site. It is our understanding that the existing structures are to be removed prior to occupancy of the new building and that the existing sewer service is scheduled for upgrade at some point in the future. The goal for the present is to determine if the peak hour sewer flow of the removed structures is less than the anticipated peak hour flow of the proposed new structure. Per previous documentation, the new office building was shown to have 22 Water Supply Fixture Units and the existing buildings being removed have 64 Water Supply Fixture Units (WSFU). In addition, the Drainage Fixture Units (DFU) were calculated for the new proposed building and the existing buildings being removed (based on UPC 2012, chapter 7). Proposed New Building: 23 DFU’s Removed Buildings: 54 DFU’s In addition, for an estimated peak hour flow in gallons per minute, the following is used: New Office Building: 70 Occupants Water Use: 1.6 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (low flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 2.1 gallons per hour per person Estimated New Peak Total: 70 people x 2.1 gallons/hour = 147 gallons per hour. Existing Residential Buildings: 5 Buildings 2 Persons per Building 10 People total Water Use: Shower: 2.5gpm x 10 minutes = 25 gallons per shower per person per hr 3.5 gallons per toilet flush per hour per person (old high flow toilets) 0.5 gallons per lav use per hour per person 29 gallons per hour per person   1107 East Main Page 2   Estimated Existing Peak Total: 10 people x 29 gallons = 290 gallons per hour. (note: this number could be higher if clothes washing and dishwashing happen simultaneously with showering and toileting). (note: these numbers assume the old toilets are 3.5 gallons per flush and the new toilets meet current code standards of 1.6 gallons per flush. If the existing toilets have not been replaced in the last 10-15 years, this is likely accurate. If the toilets have not been replaced in 20-30 years, the existing toilets could have flow rates as high as 6 gallons per flush.) Therefore, based on the above information for the three different calculation methods - maximum WSFU, DFU and estimated peak flow - the new building sewer flow will not exceed the existing building sewer flow. Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information or clarification. Sincerely, Curtis L. Smit, PE Consulting Design Solutions, Inc. Copy: file Larua Dornberger, Locati Architects Mark Esponda, Dick Anderson Construction | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana   Parking (B-2) Floor Area = 85% x gross SF (or use Sec. 38.25.010 1a to calculate) Office Parking Required: (1 space per 250 SF) Proposed Building 1  Floor Area: 17,147 SF x 85% = 14,575 SF  Parking Required: 14,575 / 250 = 58 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 58 spaces required  Provided 61 spaces provided  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d) Future Building 2 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 5,000 SF x 85% = 4,250 SF  Parking (office): 4,250 / 250 = 17 spaces  Parking (Res.) 15,000 SF (10 Beds) = 10 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 10 x 50% = 5 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 22 spaces required  Provided 64 spaces + 5 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 80  Subtotal Provided 130 Future Building 3 (mixed use)  Floor Area (office) 4,000 SF x 85% = 3,400 SF  Parking (office): 3,400 / 250 = 14 spaces  Parking (Res.) 12,000 SF (12 Beds) = 12 spaces  Reduction (Res.) 12 x 50% = 6 spaces (Sec. 38.25.040-2 Table)  Required 20 spaces required  Provided 29 spaces + 6 garage spaces provided  Bike 3 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 100  Subtotal Provided 165 Future Building 4A  Floor Area: 16,000 SF x 85% = 13,600 SF  Parking Required: 13,600 / 250 = 55 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 55 spaces required  Provided see 4B  Bike 6 bicycle parking spaces provide (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 155  Subtotal Provided see 4B Page | 2 Future Building 4B  Floor Area: 18,800 SF x 85% = 15,900 SF  Parking Required: 15,900 / 250 = 64 spaces  Reduction N/A  Required 64 spaces required  Provided 54 spaces provided  Bike 7 bicycle parking spaces provided (10% parking req’d)  Subtotal Req’d 219  Subtotal Provided 219 ______________________________________________________________________ TOTAL PARKING 219 spaces (Includes accessible spaces) Setbacks Setbacks for Buildings: a. Front yard: seven feet, except along arterials where minimum is 25 feet. b. Rear yard: ten feet. c. Side yards: five feet (except zero lot lines as allowed by section 38.21.060). Setbacks for Parking and loading areas: a. Front yard: 25 feet. b. Rear yard; ten feet. 1 c. Side yards: eight feet. 1 1 Side and rear yards for parking may be allowed to be zero feet when coordinated parking arrangements between adjacent properties is provided. Building Height a. Roof pitch less than 3:12: 38 feet. b. Roof pitch 3:12 or greater: 44 feet. d. Maximum height otherwise cumulatively allowed by this section may be increased by 30 percent through the approval of a conditional use permit, but only when the additional height is a specifically identified purpose of the review.   | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana Phase 2 / Building 2 Open Space Required: 150 sf open space x (5) 2 bedroom units = 750 sf Open Space Required = 750 sf (Open space provided by 10’x15’ (min.) private individual balconies to be 750 sf) Phase 3 / Building 3 Open Space Required: 150 sf open space x (6) 2 bedroom units = 900 sf Open Space Required = 900 sf (Open space provided by 10’x15’ (min.) private individual balconies to be 900 sf) Phase 2 / Building 2 Parkland Calculations: Density: 5 units / 4.29 acres = 1.16 units/acre Required Parkland = 5 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.15 acres (6,534 sf) Phase 3 / Building 3 Parkland Calculations: Density: 6 units / 4.29 acres = 1.40 units/acre Required Parkland = 6 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.18 acres (7,841 sf) Cumulative Phase 2&3 / Building 2&3 Parkland Calculations: Density: 11 units / 4.29 acres = 2.56 units/acre Required Parkland = 11 units x (0.03 acres) = 0.33 acres (14,374 sf) Parkland Proposal (estimate):  Estimated Cash in-lieu value for park land not provided = 0.33 AC x $35,000 (estimated value)/AC = $11550.00 (appraisal to determine value at time of phase 2&3 development) Page | 1     | BOZEMAN COMMONS| East Main Street Bozeman, Montana PHASE I SIGNAGE Phase 1 office 124 Linear Feet of Building Frontage 25 lf building frontage x 2 sf of signage = 50 sf signage 99 lf building frontage x 1.5 sf of signage = 148.5 sf signage Signage = 198.5 sf of signage allowed x (weighted lot allowance) 400sf max signage /5 buildings sf = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE MASTER SITE PLAN COMPREHENSIVE SIGNAGE PLAN Wall signs are to primarily be comprised of metal letters held slightly in front of the building facade. Font and color may very but must be approved by building owner. Sign design must minimize connections to the building (ie no individual letter attachment). No projecting sings may be permitted unless approved by building owner. It is preferred that signs are internally illuminated. Externally illuminated signs must have approval from the building owner. Signage affixed to the interior of the windows and doors is allowed on the main level of the building and is required to meet all city requirements. At a future date the development may request a low profile sign that identifies the complex which is in addition to the sign area already permitted by UDC. APPROVAL AUTHORITY Building Owner Jerry Locati 1007 E Main St, Ste 202 Bozeman, MT 59715 TOTAL SIGNAGE ESTIMATES Lot signage can be redistributed by percentages so as the total signage for the entire development does not exceed 400 SF Page | 2     BUILDING 1 124 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 99 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 148.5 sf of signage Signage = 198.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 2 133 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 108 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 162 sf of signage Signage = 212 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 3A 46 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 2 sf = 50 sf of signage 21 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 31.5 sf of signage Signage = 81.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 3B 98 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 3 sf = 75 sf of signage 73 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 109.5 sf of signage Signage = 184.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE BUILDING 4 138 total building linear feet 25 building lf x 3 sf = 75 sf of signage 113 building lf x 1.5 signage sf = 169.5 sf of signage Signage = 244.5 SF, however lot max signage = 400 / 5 buildings = 80 sf signage per building 80 SF TOTAL SIGNAGE DRYWELL #1A REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2 )C * Area Hardscape 0.95 3694 3510Landscape0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 3694 3510 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.08 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.03 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)238 3. Calculate Drywell Volume Existing Soil Condition Fine Sand Percolation Rate (min/in) 31 (see Circular DEQ 4, Percolation Rate (ft/hr) 0.16 Table 2.1-1) Porous Media in Drywell Gravel Void Ratio of Media 30.00% Gravel Offset Dist. From Drywell (ft) 3 Proposed Drywell Gravel Area (ft2)92.1 Infilitration Volume (ft3)29.71 Required Drywell Depth (ft) 7.53 Proposed Drywell Depth (ft) 7.75 (round up to nearest 3") Provided Volume Inc. Perc. (ft3)244 DRYWELL #1B REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2 )C * Area Hardscape 0.95 5016 4765Landscape0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 5016 4765 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.12 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.04 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)323 3. Calculate Drywell Volume Existing Soil Condition Fine Sand Percolation Rate (min/in) 31 (see Circular DEQ 4, Percolation Rate (ft/hr) 0.16 Table 2.1-1) Porous Media in Drywell Gravel Void Ratio of Media 30.00% Gravel Offset Dist. From Drywell (ft) 4 Drywell Gravel Area (ft2)129.3 Infilitration Volume (ft3)41.70 Required Drywell Depth (ft) 7.25 Proposed Drywell Depth (ft) 7.5 (round up to nearest 3") Provided Volume Inc. Perc. (ft3)333 RETENTION POND 1A REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 3827 3635 ROW Landscape 0.2 66 13 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 3893 3648 C=Weighted C Factor 0.94 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.94 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.09 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.03 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)247 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)296 RETENTION POND 1B REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 8118 7712 ROW Landscape 0.2 369 74 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 8487 7786 C=Weighted C Factor 0.92 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.92 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.19 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.07 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)528 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)556 RETENTION POND 1C REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 7756 7368 ROW Landscape 0.2 597 119 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 8353 7488 C=Weighted C Factor 0.90 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.90 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.19 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.07 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)507 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)630 RETENTION POND 1D REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 1969 1871 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 1969 1871 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.05 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.02 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)127 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)153 RETENTION POND 1E REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 1464 1391 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 1464 1391 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.03 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.01 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)94 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)144 RETENTION POND 1F REQUIRED VOLUME 1. Calculate Area and Weighted C Factor Contributing Area C Area (ft 2)C * Area ROW Hardscape 0.95 5778 5489 ROW Landscape 0.2 0 0 OS/Park 0.2 0 0 Low-Med Residential 0.35 0 0 Dense Residential 0.5 0 0 Commercial Neighborhood 0.6 0 0 Commercial Downtown 0.8 0 0 Industrial 0.8 0 0 Total 5778 5489 C=Weighted C Factor 0.95 2. Calculate Required Volume Q = CIA V=7200Q C = Weighted C Factor 0.95 I = intensity (in/hr) 0.41 (10 yr, 2hr storm) A = Area (acres) 0.13 Q = runoff (cfs) 0.05 V = REQUIRED VOL (ft3)372 PROVIDED VOLUME (ft3)475 East Main Development Traffic Impact Study Bozeman, Montana Prepared For: C&H Engineering & Surveying 1091 Stoneridge Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 January, 2017 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana i Table of Contents A. Executive Summary ...................................................................................... 1 B. Project Description ........................................................................................ 1 C. Existing Conditions ........................................................................................ 1 Adjacent Roadways .............................................................................. 2 Traffic Data ............................................................................................ 2 Historic Traffic Data ............................................................................... 3 Level of Service ..................................................................................... 3 Planned Road Improvements ................................................................ 4 D. Proposed Development .............................................................................. 4 E. Trip Generation and Assignment ................................................................ 6 F. Trip Distribution .......................................................................................... 6 G. Traffic Impacts Outside of the Development ............................................... 6 H. Impact Summary & Recommendations ...................................................... 8 List of Figures Figure 1 – Proposed Development Site ...................................................................2 Figure 2 – Proposed Development ..........................................................................5 Figure 3 –Trip Distribution .......................................................................................7 List of Tables Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data .................................................................................3 Table 2 – 2016 Level of Service Summary ..............................................................4 Table 3 – Trip Generation Rates .............................................................................6 Table 4 – Future Level of Service Summary ...........................................................7 East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 1 January 2017 East Main Development Traffic Impact Study Bozeman, Montana A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The East Main Development is a 4.3-acre, mixed-use project located north of East Main Street in Bozeman, MT. At full build-out in 2019 the project would produce 796 daily vehicle trips. As proposed, the East Main Development will not create any additional roadway capacity problems in this area. While some capacity issues exist in the area, no detailed plans are currently proposed to address these generally minor issues. The impact from the proposed development at these intersections would be minimal. It would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. It would also be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are redeveloped. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION This document studies the possible effect on the surrounding road system from a proposed commercial/residential development project located along East Main Street in Bozeman, Montana. The development includes a variety of mixed-use office/commercial properties with attached residential apartments. This document identifies any traffic mitigation efforts that the development may require. The site is located north of East Main Street between Cypress Street and Highland Boulevard. Based on the City of Bozeman Subdivision Regulations, the developers must study all effected intersections within ½ mile of the proposed development, which includes the intersections of East Main Street with Broadway Avenue, Cypress Street, Highland Boulevard, and Haggerty Lane. C. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed development property currently consists of a 4.3-acre parcel of undeveloped land located north of East Main Street which would be developed into mixed-use commercial/residential development. The topography in this area is mostly flat but slopes dramatically downward to the north along the northern edge of the property. Several new professional offices and retail buildings have been constructed to the west of the site including the construction firm of Langlas & Associates, Anderson Zurmuehlen Accounting, the Ferguson gallery, the Bozeman Dharma Center, and Locati Architects & Interiors. These properties are accessed by a single approach onto Main Street east of Cypress Street. This existing approach is located within the existing left-turn lane for Cypress Street and is technically considered a right in/out only approach. However, field observations indicate that almost of half of drivers using the intersection currently turn left into and out of the approach. There are currently five residences on East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 2 January 2017 the east edge of the development property are accessed through an easement across an adjoining property. The Buggy Bath car wash is located just east of the site and has three existing approaches onto Main Street. See Figure 1 for a location map of the proposed development. Figure 1- Proposed Development Site Adjacent Roadways East Main Street is an east/west principal arterial route through the City of Bozeman. In this area the road has a five-lane cross-section and a paved width of 85 feet. The intersections of Broadway Avenue and Highland Boulevard are currently signalized. The posted speed limit is 35 MPH east of the proposed site and decreased to 25 MPH at Cypress Street. According to traffic data available from MDT, the road currently carries 12,700 VPD east of Highland Boulevard. Traffic Counts In December 2016 Abelin Traffic Services (ATS) collected turning movement count data at adjacent intersections along East Main Street. Additional data was obtained from the Bozeman TMP Existing Conditions Memo which identifies traffic volumes and LOS calculations for adjacent intersections. Additional traffic data was obtained for MDT = East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 3 January 2017 identifying historic traffic volumes on East Main Street. The raw traffic data is included in Appendix A of this report. Historic Traffic Data Abelin Traffic Services obtained historic traffic data for East Main Street from the Montana DOT. This data is presented in Table 1. The traffic data history for this area indicates that traffic volumes on East Main Street have not increased in the last ten years. Table 1 – Historic Traffic Data East Main Location 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 East of Highland Drive 12,200 12,230 10,960 11,160 11,920 11,920 11,440 11,610 12,680 12,037 East of Rouse Avenue 14,100 13,520 12,310 12,530 12,550 12,550 12,180 12,360 12,550 11,787 Level of Service Using the data collected for this project, ATS conducted a Level of Service (LOS) analysis at area intersections. This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the procedures outlined in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) - Special Report 209 and the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 6.9. Intersections are graded from A to F representing the average delay that a vehicle entering an intersection can expect. Typically, a LOS of C or better is considered acceptable for peak-hour conditions. Note that the current Bozeman TMP LOS analysis was performed using the Vistro analysis software and the LOS analysis for this project was performed using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) version 6.9, which produce slightly different results but are generally in agreement about the current traffic operations. Table 2 shows the existing 2016 LOS for the AM and PM peak hours without the traffic from the proposed development. The LOS calculations are included in Appendix C. The table shows that the existing intersections along East Main Street have some existing operational issues. The signalized intersection of Highland Boulevard currently operates at LOS D in the PM peak hour. This operational issue could be corrected by the installation of a designated right-turn lane for eastbound traffic at the intersection (identified in the Bozeman TMP). The intersection of Haggerty Lane is experiencing high levels of delay and would require the installation of a traffic signal or modern roundabout for better operation. Plans for a higher level of traffic control at this intersection have been proposed in the past but have not been implemented. The Cypress Street intersection and the existing professional office accesses are also experiencing higher levels of delay in the PM peak hours but there is currently insufficient traffic at this intersection to warrant any higher level of traffic control at these locations (traffic signal or roundabout). East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 4 January 2017 Table 2 – 2016 Level of Service Summary Main Street Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Broadway Avenue 7.7 A 8.4 A Cypress Street* 22.7 C 35.6 E Existing Access 1* 23.3 B 25.4 D Highland Boulevard 15.0 B 37.9 D Haggerty Lane* 33.9 D 425 F *Northbound or Southbound Side Street LOS and Delay Planned Road Improvements The City of Bozeman currently has a variety of improvements planned for the East Main Street area which will be detailed in the upcoming release of the Bozeman Transportation Management Plan (February 2017). These recommended improvements include lane and signal improvements at the Highland Boulevard intersection and geometric improvements and a traffic signal installation at the Haggerty Lane intersection. Long-term plans for the area include widening Highland Boulevard to add additional road capacity for future development. It is expected that most of these improvements will be driven by future growth in the area. D. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The development currently under consideration for this site includes 4.3 acres of land located north of East Main Street which would be developed into a mixed-use commercial development. The site would consist of several offices, mixed-retail, and residential apartments. Access to the site would be obtained through the existing shared approach on the west edge of the property and a new proposed approach towards the middle of the development. There are currently no other options available for alternative access to the site except for the two direct approaches onto East Main Street. The developers plan to begin Phase 1 of the development which would include a 17.1 KSF office building in 2017 and would not include the new approach onto East Main Street. It is expected that development of the remaining properties would be completed by 2019. The East Main Development site plan is shown in Figure 2. East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 5 January 2017 Figure 3 – Proposed East Main Development East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 6 January 2017 E. TRIP GENERATION AND ASSIGNMENT ATS performed a trip generation analysis to determine the anticipated future traffic volumes from the proposed developments using the trip generation rates contained in Trip Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers, Ninth Edition). These rates are the national standard and are based on the most current information available to planners. A vehicle “trip” is defined as any trip that either begins or ends at the development site. ATS determined that the critical traffic impacts on the intersections and roadways would occur during the weekday morning and evening peak hours. According to the ITE trip generation rates, at full build-out the development would produce 105 AM peak hour trips, 101 PM peak hour trips, and 796 daily trips. The Phase 1 office would produce 189 daily vehicle trips. See Table 3 for detailed trip generation information. Table 3 - Trip Generation Rates Land Use Units AM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit Total AM Peak Hour Trip Ends PM Peak Hour Trip Ends per Unit Total PM Peak Hour Trip Ends Weekday Trip Ends per Unit Total Weekday Trip Ends Phase 1 Office 17.12 ksf 1.56 27 1.49 26 11.03 189 Office Lot 2 22 ksf 1.56 34 1.49 33 11.03 243 Office Lot 3 16 ksf 1.56 25 1.49 24 11.03 176 Business Park Lot 4 5 ksf 1.43 7 1.29 6 12.76 64 Residential Lot 4 6 units 0.51 3 0.62 4 6.65 40 Business Park Lot 5 4 ksf 1.43 6 1.29 5 12.76 51 Residential Lot 5 5 units 0.51 3 0.62 3 6.65 33 Total 105 101 796 F. TRIP DISTRIBUTION The traffic distribution and assignment for the proposed subdivisions was based upon the existing ADT volumes along the adjacent roadways and the peak-hour turning volumes. Traffic is expected to distribute onto the surrounding road network as shown on Figure 3. G. TRAFFIC IMPACTS OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT Using the trip generation and trip distribution numbers, ATS determined the future Level of Service for the area intersections. The anticipated intersection LOS with the East Main Commercial development is shown in Table 4. These calculations are included in Appendix B of this report. East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 7 January 2017 Figure 3 – Trip Distribution Table 4 indicates that the construction of the East Main Street commercial development will not cause any new roadway capacity problems along East Main Street. The existing capacity problems at the area intersection will be largely unaffected by the proposed development. As proposed, the new access onto West Main Street will function at LOS C at full build out of the property. It would be desirable to add separated southbound lanes at the existing site access or at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. If the second access onto West Main Street was eliminated and all traffic from the proposed development were forced onto the existing approach, the intersection would function at LOS E (45.3 seconds of delay). It should also be noted the existing approach is adjacent to the existing left-turn lane for Cypress Street and is technically a right in/out only approach, although drivers are currently treating this access as a full- movement approach. It could be desirable to formalize the right in/out approach at the existing location using lane channelization and use the new approach location to service the left-turn traffic for the existing and proposed site traffic. Table 4 –Future Level of Service Summary Main Street Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay (Sec.) LOS Delay (Sec.) LOS Broadway Avenue 7.9 A 8.5 A Cypress Street* 25.4 D 38.7 E Existing Access 1* 21.6 C 30.6 D Proposed Access 2* 12.3 B 15.1 C Highland Boulevard 16.2 B 38.7 D Haggerty Lane* 36.5 E 456 F *Northbound or Southbound Side Street LOS and Delay An analysis was also performed for Phase 1 of the development to determine if the construction of the Phase 1 office building alone could be accommodated with the existing single approach into Cypress Main Street 13% 15% 20% 50% East Main Commercial Development 0% 2% Highland Haggerty East Main Development TIS Bozeman, Montana Abelin Traffic Services 8 January 2017 the property. The analysis suggests that the existing approach would still function at LOS D with 26.0 seconds of peak-hour delay with the Phase 1 office building, which is a minimal change from the existing conditions (25.4 seconds of delay). It would be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are developed. H. IMPACT SUMMARY & RECOMMENDATIONS As proposed, the East Main Development will not create any additional roadway capacity problems in this area. While some capacity issues exist in the area, no detailed plans are currently proposed to address these generally minor issues. The impact from the proposed development at these intersections would be minimal. It would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the proposed access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. It would also be desirable for the developers to provide ROW to the east of the property to allow for future road connections to the east if and when the adjacent properties are redeveloped. APPENDIX A Traffic Data File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 2 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 07:45 AM 1 0 1 0 2 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 14 Total 1 0 1 0 2 7 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 16 08:00 AM 0 0 2 0 2 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 25 08:15 AM 0 0 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 17 *** BREAK *** Total 0 0 4 0 4 19 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 19 42 *** BREAK *** 04:30 PM 7 0 2 0 9 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 14 04:45 PM 11 0 4 0 15 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 Total 18 0 6 0 24 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 31 05:00 PM 13 0 9 0 22 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 24 05:15 PM 3 0 4 0 7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 05:30 PM 8 0 6 0 14 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17 Grand Total 43 0 30 0 73 35 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 31 139 Apprch %58.9 0 41.1 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 Total %30.9 0 21.6 0 52.5 25.2 0 0 0 25.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22.3 0 22.3 Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 1 Groups Printed- Class 1 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 2 0 2 2 97 0 0 99 178 07:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2 1 130 2 0 133 2 0 9 1 12 0 167 0 0 167 314 Total 0 0 0 2 2 2 206 2 0 210 2 0 11 1 14 2 264 0 0 266 492 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 149 1 0 6 0 7 2 127 0 0 129 285 08:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 127 1 0 128 1 0 7 0 8 1 114 0 0 115 253 *** BREAK *** Total 0 0 0 2 2 0 276 1 0 277 2 0 13 0 15 3 241 0 0 244 538 *** BREAK *** 04:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 175 2 0 179 0 0 3 0 3 3 153 0 0 156 341 04:45 PM 1 0 0 1 2 2 176 0 0 178 1 0 4 1 6 8 138 1 0 147 333 Total 2 0 0 3 5 4 351 2 0 357 1 0 7 1 9 11 291 1 0 303 674 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 179 1 0 181 3 0 1 2 6 12 156 0 0 168 355 05:15 PM 2 0 1 0 3 0 153 1 0 154 0 0 6 0 6 7 191 1 0 199 362 05:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 142 2 0 146 1 0 2 1 4 3 145 0 0 148 301 Grand Total 5 0 1 9 15 9 1307 9 0 1325 9 0 40 5 54 38 1288 2 0 1328 2722 Apprch %33.3 0 6.7 60 0.7 98.6 0.7 0 16.7 0 74.1 9.3 2.9 97 0.2 0 Total %0.2 0 0 0.3 0.6 0.3 48 0.3 0 48.7 0.3 0 1.5 0.2 2 1.4 47.3 0.1 0 48.8 Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 2 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 76 0 0 77 0 0 2 0 2 2 97 0 0 99 178 07:45 AM 0 0 0 2 2 1 130 2 0 133 2 0 9 1 12 0 167 0 0 167 314 08:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 149 0 0 149 1 0 6 0 7 2 127 0 0 129 285 08:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 0 127 1 0 128 1 0 7 0 8 1 114 0 0 115 253 Total Volume 0 0 0 4 4 2 482 3 0 487 4 0 24 1 29 5 505 0 0 510 1030 % App. Total 0 0 0 100 0.4 99 0.6 0 13.8 0 82.8 3.4 1 99 0 0 PHF .000 .000 .000 .500 .500 .500 .809 .375 .000 .817 .500 .000 .667 .250 .604 .625 .756 .000 .000 .763 .820 Cypress Main Main Cypress Right 0 Thru 0 Left 0 Peds 4 InOut Total 2 4 6 Right2 Thru482 Left3 Peds0 OutTotalIn509 487 996 Left 24 Thru 0 Right 4 Peds 1 Out TotalIn 8 29 37 Left0 Thru505 Right5 Peds0 TotalOutIn506 510 1016 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Class 1 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 3 Cypress Southbound Main Westbound Cypress Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:30 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:30 PM 04:30 PM 1 0 0 2 3 2 175 2 0 179 0 0 3 0 3 3 153 0 0 156 341 04:45 PM 1 0 0 1 2 2 176 0 0 178 1 0 4 1 6 8 138 1 0 147 333 05:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 179 1 0 181 3 0 1 2 6 12 156 0 0 168 355 05:15 PM 2 0 1 0 3 0 153 1 0 154 0 0 6 0 6 7 191 1 0 199 362 Total Volume 4 0 1 3 8 5 683 4 0 692 4 0 14 3 21 30 638 2 0 670 1391 % App. Total 50 0 12.5 37.5 0.7 98.7 0.6 0 19 0 66.7 14.3 4.5 95.2 0.3 0 PHF .500 .000 .250 .375 .667 .625 .954 .500 .000 .956 .333 .000 .583 .375 .875 .625 .835 .500 .000 .842 .961 Cypress Main Main Cypress Right 4 Thru 0 Left 1 Peds 3 InOut Total 7 8 15 Right5 Thru683 Left4 Peds0 OutTotalIn643 692 1335 Left 14 Thru 0 Right 4 Peds 3 Out TotalIn 34 21 55 Left2 Thru638 Right30 Peds0 TotalOutIn701 670 1371 Peak Hour Begins at 04:30 PM Class 1 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 2 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 07:30 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:30 AM 07:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 07:45 AM 1 0 1 0 2 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 14 08:00 AM 0 0 2 0 2 11 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 25 08:15 AM 0 0 2 0 2 8 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 17 Total Volume 1 0 5 0 6 26 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 26 58 % App. Total 16.7 0 83.3 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 PHF .250 .000 .625 .000 .750 .591 .000 .000 .000 .591 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .542 .000 .542 .580 Offices Main Main Offices Right 1 Thru 0 Left 5 Peds 0 InOut Total 52 6 58 Right26 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn5 26 31 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 0 0 Left26 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn1 26 27 Peak Hour Begins at 07:30 AM Class 2 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 File Name : TMC Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/19/2016 Page No : 3 Offices Southbound Main Westbound Offices Northbound Main Eastbound Start Time Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Rig ht Thr u Left Ped s App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Right Thr u Left Peds App. Total Int. Total Peak Hour Analysis From 12:00 PM to 05:30 PM - Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM 04:45 PM 11 0 4 0 15 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 05:00 PM 13 0 9 0 22 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 24 05:15 PM 3 0 4 0 7 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 9 05:30 PM 8 0 6 0 14 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 17 Total Volume 35 0 23 0 58 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 67 % App. Total 60.3 0 39.7 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 PHF .673 .000 .639 .000 .659 .750 .000 .000 .000 .750 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .750 .000 .750 .698 Offices Main Main Offices Right 35 Thru 0 Left 23 Peds 0 InOut Total 9 58 67 Right6 Thru0 Left0 Peds0 OutTotalIn23 6 29 Left 0 Thru 0 Right 0 Peds 0 Out TotalIn 0 0 0 Left3 Thru0 Right0 Peds0 TotalOutIn35 3 38 Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM Class 2 Peak Hour Data North Abelin Traffic Services 130 S. Howie Street Helena, MT 59601 APPENDIX B Traffic Model East Main Development Traffic Model AM Peak Hour Existing 2016 Traffic 0 1 1 26 0 0 0 0 1 2 23 114 0 614 0 616 0 642 0 463 0 773 93 524 0 3 5 2 0 0 0 379 0 92 East Main 41 0 24 26 0 0 0 0 173 2 62 508 596 0 574 0 579 0 287 1 332 0 5 4 1 0 1 1 264 129 83 49 Seasonal Factor 1 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty PM Peak Hour Existing 2016 Traffic 0 5 35 6 0 0 8 0 1 0 31 138 0 799 0 768 0 774 6 428 0 496 140 675 0 4 23 0 0 2 3 155 1 69 East Main 73 2 14 3 1 0 3 1 341 2 97 685 795 0 796 0 819 0 612 0 811 0 30 4 1 1 0 2 180 363 150 95 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty East Main Development Traffic Model IN 89 AM Peak Hour 40%OUT 16 60% Site Generated Traffic 6 36 10 53 4 12 6 19 2 10 6 12 19 17 8 2 3 31 East Main 12 23 35 6 12 2 46 58 35 2 3 3 2 0 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty IN 21 PM Peak Hour 40%OUT 80 60% Site Generated Traffic 32 8 48 13 21 3 31 4 10 52 31 3 4 4 42 11 17 7 East Main 3 5 8 28 3 0 11 14 8 11 17 15 11 2 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty East Main Development Traffic Model AM Peak Hour Total Projected Traffic 0 1 5 38 6 19 0 0 1 2 23 116 0 624 0 622 0 654 0 482 0 790 93 532 0 3 7 2 3 0 0 379 0 92 East Main 53 0 24 49 0 35 0 0 185 2 64 554 654 0 609 0 581 0 290 1 335 0 5 4 1 0 1 1 266 129 83 49 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty PM Peak Hour Total Projected Traffic 0 5 56 9 31 4 8 0 1 0 31 148 0 851 0 799 0 777 6 432 0 500 140 717 0 4 34 0 17 2 3 155 1 69 East Main 76 2 14 8 1 8 3 1 344 2 97 696 809 0 804 0 830 0 629 0 826 0 30 4 1 1 0 2 191 363 152 95 Broadway Cypress Existing 1 Proposed 2 Highland Haggerty APPENDIX C Level of Service HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)1 596 5 3 614 1 24 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)1 3 32 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)942 956 235 758 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 8.8 22.7 9.8 Level of Service, LOS A A C A Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 22.7 9.8 Approach LOS C A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:36:00 AMCypressAM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 795 30 4 799 5 14 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 5 21 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)775 759 138 642 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.15 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 9.8 35.6 10.6 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.1 35.6 10.6 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:37:36 AMCypressPM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)26 574 1 2 616 26 0 0 1 5 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)30 2 1 7 Capacity, c (veh/h)916 983 784 204 v/c Ratio 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.03 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 8.7 9.6 23.3 Level of Service, LOS A A A C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.4 0.0 9.6 23.3 Approach LOS A C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:38:09 AMEx1AM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)3 796 1 2 768 6 1 0 1 23 0 35 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)3 2 2 66 Capacity, c (veh/h)800 781 191 242 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.27 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.5 9.6 24.1 25.4 Level of Service, LOS A A C D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 24.1 25.4 Approach LOS C D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:38:39 AMEx1PM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 332 83 92 773 2 62 0 49 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 105 126 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)764 1087 247 568 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.10 0.51 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.3 2.7 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 8.7 33.9 11.4 Level of Service, LOS A A D B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.9 33.9 11.4 Approach LOS D B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:39:08 AMHaggertyAM.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 811 150 69 496 0 97 0 95 1 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 81 226 2 Capacity, c (veh/h)987 614 129 164 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.13 1.75 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.5 17.1 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.7 11.8 425.4 27.3 Level of Service, LOS A B F D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 1.4 425.4 27.3 Approach LOS F D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:39:45 AMHaggertyPM.xtw HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak Hour PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainAM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 41 508 524 114 93 0 23 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 53.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 80.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 58.0 58.0 22.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.6 10.8 7.7 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 3.1 3.1 0.1 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 302 315 415 390 130 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1442 1546 1699 1593 1579 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.0 6.6 7.4 8.8 5.7 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 5.8 6.6 7.4 8.8 5.7 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.21 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 1007 1024 1126 1056 336 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.300 0.307 0.369 0.369 0.388 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)40.7 44.8 62.3 57.2 52.9 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)1.6 1.7 2.4 2.3 2.1 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 5.5 5.7 6.0 6.0 27.0 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 27.3 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 5.7 A 6.1 A 0.0 27.3 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 7.7 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.0 A 1.1 A 0.7 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:40:06 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak Hour PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainPM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 73 685 675 138 140 0 31 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 48.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 74.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 53.0 53.0 21.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 14.5 11.7 9.9 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 4.2 4.3 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.02 0.00 0.06 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 396 456 455 428 192 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1278 1561 1716 1614 1598 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 1.2 12.5 9.7 9.4 7.9 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 11.0 12.5 9.7 9.4 7.9 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.22 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 888 1013 1113 1047 346 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.446 0.450 0.409 0.409 0.556 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)53.9 68.4 65 60.3 74.9 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.9 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 6.0 6.5 6.2 6.2 25.8 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.2 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 6.1 6.6 6.3 6.3 27.0 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.4 A 6.3 A 0.0 27.0 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 8.4 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.2 A 0.8 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 9:00:29 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak Hour PHF 0.79 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainAM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 287 264 379 463 0 173 1 129 0 1 0 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 13.8 27.9 13.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 70.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 32.9 18.8 51.8 18.2 18.2 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 12.9 12.5 2.0 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.7 0.8 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 351 323 480 586 0 219 165 0 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 826 1716 1454 1634 1716 0 1410 1456 0 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 10.8 12.0 10.9 4.8 0.0 10.4 7.2 0.0 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 10.8 12.0 10.9 4.8 0.0 10.5 7.2 0.0 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.40 0.40 0.40 0.63 0.67 0.19 0.19 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 433 685 581 599 2294 368 275 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.513 0.556 0.800 0.256 0.000 0.595 0.599 0.000 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.3 108.8 105.4 75.1 32.2 0 85.1 61.2 0 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 4.3 4.2 3.0 1.3 0.0 3.3 2.4 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 12.6 15.9 16.2 10.5 4.6 27.3 26.0 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 2.6 3.7 1.0 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.8 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 12.7 18.5 19.9 11.4 4.9 27.9 26.8 Level of Service (LOS)B B B B A C C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 19.2 B 7.8 A 27.4 C 23.1 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 15.0 B Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.0 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.1 A 1.4 A 1.1 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:40:06 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak Hour PHF 0.88 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainPM.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 612 180 155 428 0 341 0 363 3 6 8 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 8.6 31.4 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 95.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 35.4 12.6 48.0 47.0 47.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.3 3.3 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.4 45.0 22.8 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 Phase Call Probability 0.99 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 1.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 482 444 176 486 0 388 413 19 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 906 1716 1581 1634 1716 0 1392 1454 1068 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 24.8 24.8 6.4 8.4 0.0 21.8 20.6 0.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 24.8 24.8 6.4 8.4 0.0 43.0 20.6 20.8 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.45 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 376 568 523 266 1590 396 658 528 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.848 0.849 0.663 0.306 0.000 0.979 0.627 0.037 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.5 300 280 60 82.2 0 339.1 172.5 5.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 11.8 11.0 2.4 3.2 0.0 13.3 6.8 0.2 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 21.3 29.6 29.6 21.6 15.9 38.5 19.9 15.1 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 13.1 14.1 1.1 0.5 0.0 39.5 1.4 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 21.3 42.7 43.6 22.7 16.4 78.0 21.3 15.1 Level of Service (LOS)C D D C B E C B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 43.1 D 18.1 B 48.8 D 15.1 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 37.9 D Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.1 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.0 A 1.8 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 9:00:29 AM HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)1 654 5 3 624 1 24 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)1 3 32 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)933 900 209 752 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.9 9.0 25.4 9.8 Level of Service, LOS A A D A Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.0 25.4 9.8 Approach LOS D A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:46:32 AMCypressAMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Cypress St. Time Analyzed PM Peak With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 809 30 4 851 5 14 0 4 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 5 21 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)735 748 128 613 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.01 0.16 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.9 9.8 38.7 10.9 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.1 38.7 10.9 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:47:08 AMCypressPMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)49 609 1 2 622 38 0 0 1 7 0 5 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)56 2 1 14 Capacity, c (veh/h)899 947 760 231 v/c Ratio 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.06 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 Control Delay (s/veh)9.3 8.8 9.7 21.6 Level of Service, LOS A A A C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.7 0.0 9.7 21.6 Approach LOS A C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:48:12 AMEx1AMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Existing Office Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Existing Offices Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.90 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)8 804 1 2 799 9 1 0 1 34 0 56 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)9 2 2 100 Capacity, c (veh/h)787 789 182 238 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.42 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.6 9.6 25.1 30.6 Level of Service, LOS A A D D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.1 0.0 25.1 30.6 Approach LOS D D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:48:53 AMEx1PMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Proposed App. Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Proposed Approach Time Analyzed AM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)35 581 1 2 654 19 0 0 1 3 0 6 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Left Only 1 Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)40 2 1 10 Capacity, c (veh/h)888 975 780 505 v/c Ratio 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.02 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Control Delay (s/veh)9.2 8.7 9.6 12.3 Level of Service, LOS A A A B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.5 0.0 9.6 12.3 Approach LOS A B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:49:56 AMProp2AMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Proposed App. Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Proposed Approach Time Analyzed PM Peak Hour - With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)8 830 1 2 777 4 3 0 2 17 0 31 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.000 0.000 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Left Only 1 Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)9 2 5 54 Capacity, c (veh/h)794 754 299 411 v/c Ratio 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.13 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 Control Delay (s/veh)9.6 9.8 17.3 15.1 Level of Service, LOS A A C C Approach Delay (s/veh)0.1 0.0 17.3 15.1 Approach LOS C C Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:51:05 AMProp2PMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed AM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.88 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 335 83 92 790 2 64 0 49 0 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 105 129 1 Capacity, c (veh/h)751 1084 239 559 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.10 0.54 0.00 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.3 2.9 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)9.8 8.7 36.5 11.4 Level of Service, LOS A A E B Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 0.9 36.5 11.4 Approach LOS E B Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:51:51 AMHaggertyAMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Two-Way Stop-Control Report General Information Site Information Analyst RLA Intersection Main & Cypress Agency/Co.ATS Jurisdiction MDT Date Performed 12/21/2016 East/West Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 North/South Street Haggerty Lane Time Analyzed PM Peak- With Dev.Peak Hour Factor 0.85 Intersection Orientation East-West Analysis Time Period (hrs)0.25 Project Description East Main Development Lanes Major Street: East-West Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement U L T R U L T R U L T R U L T R Priority 1U 1 2 3 4U 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Number of Lanes 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR LTR LTR Volume, V (veh/h)2 826 152 69 500 0 97 0 95 1 0 1 Percent Heavy Vehicles (%)2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 Proportion Time Blocked 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Percent Grade (%)0 0 Right Turn Channelized No No No No Median Type/Storage Undivided Critical and Follow-up Headways Base Critical Headway (sec) Critical Headway (sec) Base Follow-Up Headway (sec) Follow-Up Headway (sec) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Flow Rate, v (veh/h)2 81 226 2 Capacity, c (veh/h)983 603 125 159 v/c Ratio 0.00 0.13 1.81 0.01 95% Queue Length, Q₉₅ (veh)0.0 0.5 17.5 0.0 Control Delay (s/veh)8.7 11.9 456.0 27.9 Level of Service, LOS A B F D Approach Delay (s/veh)0.0 1.4 456.0 27.9 Approach LOS F D Copyright © 2017 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™TWSC Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:52:25 AMHaggertyPMwith.xtw HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainAMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 41 554 532 116 105 0 23 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 53.0 17.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 80.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 58.0 58.0 22.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 9.3 11.3 8.3 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 3.4 3.4 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 327 341 436 409 144 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1452 1546 1699 1593 1583 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.0 7.3 7.6 9.3 6.3 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 6.4 7.3 7.6 9.3 6.3 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.21 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 1013 1024 1126 1055 336 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.323 0.333 0.387 0.387 0.428 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)44.8 49.5 66.3 60.8 59 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)1.8 1.9 2.6 2.4 2.3 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 5.6 5.8 6.1 6.1 27.3 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 5.7 5.9 6.2 6.2 27.6 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 5.8 A 6.2 A 0.0 27.6 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 7.9 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.0 A 1.1 A 0.7 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:00 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.89 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Broadway File Name MainPMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 73 693 717 148 143 0 31 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 48.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 74.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated Yes Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 6 4 Case Number 8.0 8.0 12.0 Phase Duration, s 53.0 53.0 21.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 3.2 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 14.8 12.6 10.1 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 4.3 4.3 0.2 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.02 0.01 0.07 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 6 16 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 400 461 459 432 196 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 1258 1561 1716 1613 1599 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 1.6 12.8 10.6 9.5 8.1 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 12.2 12.8 10.6 9.5 8.1 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.22 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 875 1013 1113 1046 346 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.457 0.455 0.413 0.413 0.566 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)54.7 69.4 66 61.1 76.8 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)2.2 2.7 2.6 2.4 3.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 6.1 6.5 6.2 6.2 25.9 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.4 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 6.2 6.6 6.3 6.3 27.2 Level of Service (LOS)A A A A C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 6.4 A 6.3 A 0.0 27.2 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 8.5 A Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 1.9 A 1.3 A 2.7 B 2.7 B Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.2 A 1.3 A 0.8 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:59 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period AM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.79 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainAMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 290 266 379 482 0 185 1 129 0 1 0 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 14.2 26.9 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 70.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 31.9 19.2 51.0 19.0 19.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.2 3.2 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 13.2 13.2 2.0 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.8 Phase Call Probability 1.00 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 386 354 480 610 0 234 165 0 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 808 1716 1454 1634 1716 0 1410 1456 0 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 12.5 13.9 11.2 5.2 0.0 11.2 7.1 0.0 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 12.5 13.9 11.2 5.2 0.0 11.2 7.1 0.0 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.38 0.38 0.38 0.61 0.66 0.20 0.20 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 413 659 559 567 2257 383 290 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.585 0.633 0.847 0.270 0.000 0.611 0.567 0.000 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.3 128.7 125.4 80.7 35.7 0 90.5 60.1 0 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 5.1 4.9 3.2 1.4 0.0 3.6 2.4 0.0 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 13.3 17.1 17.5 11.5 5.0 26.9 25.3 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 3.6 5.1 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 13.3 20.7 22.6 12.9 5.3 27.5 25.9 Level of Service (LOS)B C C B A C C Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 21.6 C 8.6 A 26.9 C 22.5 C Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 16.2 B Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.0 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.1 A 1.4 A 1.1 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:00 AM HCS 2010 Signalized Intersection Results Summary General Information Intersection Information Agency ATS Duration, h 0.25 Analyst RLA Analysis Date Jan 4, 2017 Area Type Other Jurisdiction MDT Time Period PM Peak- With Dev. PHF 0.88 Urban Street East Main Street Analysis Year 2016 Analysis Period 1> 7:00 Intersection Highland File Name MainPMwith.xus Project Description East Main Development Demand Information EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Demand ( v ), veh/h 1 629 191 155 432 0 344 0 363 3 6 8 Signal Information Green Yellow Red 8.6 31.4 43.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle, s 95.0 Reference Phase 2 Offset, s 0 Reference Point End Uncoordinated No Simult. Gap E/W On Force Mode Fixed Simult. Gap N/S On Timer Results EBL EBT WBL WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT Assigned Phase 2 1 6 8 4 Case Number 6.3 1.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 Phase Duration, s 35.4 12.6 48.0 47.0 47.0 Change Period, ( Y+R c ), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Max Allow Headway ( MAH ), s 0.0 3.1 0.0 3.3 3.3 Queue Clearance Time ( g s ), s 8.4 45.0 22.8 Green Extension Time ( g e ), s 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 1.8 Phase Call Probability 0.99 1.00 1.00 Max Out Probability 0.00 1.00 0.00 Movement Group Results EB WB NB SB Approach Movement L T R L T R L T R L T R Assigned Movement 5 2 12 1 6 16 3 8 18 7 4 14 Adjusted Flow Rate ( v ), veh/h 1 489 449 176 491 0 391 413 19 Adjusted Saturation Flow Rate ( s ), veh/h/ln 902 1716 1578 1634 1716 0 1392 1454 1068 Queue Service Time ( g s ), s 0.1 25.3 25.3 6.4 8.5 0.0 21.9 20.6 0.2 Cycle Queue Clearance Time ( g c ), s 0.1 25.3 25.3 6.4 8.5 0.0 43.0 20.6 20.8 Green Ratio ( g/C )0.33 0.33 0.33 0.44 0.46 0.45 0.45 0.45 Capacity ( c ), veh/h 374 568 522 262 1590 396 658 528 Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ( X )0.003 0.861 0.861 0.672 0.309 0.000 0.987 0.627 0.037 Back of Queue ( Q ), ft/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.5 308.5 287.5 60.1 83.2 0 346.8 172.5 5.7 Back of Queue ( Q ), veh/ln ( 50 th percentile)0.0 12.1 11.3 2.4 3.3 0.0 13.7 6.8 0.2 Queue Storage Ratio ( RQ ) ( 50 th percentile)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay ( d 1 ), s/veh 21.3 29.7 29.7 21.8 16.0 38.5 19.9 15.1 Incremental Delay ( d 2 ), s/veh 0.0 14.0 15.0 1.1 0.5 0.0 41.5 1.4 0.0 Initial Queue Delay ( d 3 ), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay ( d ), s/veh 21.3 43.7 44.8 22.9 16.5 80.0 21.3 15.1 Level of Service (LOS)C D D C B F C B Approach Delay, s/veh / LOS 44.2 D 18.2 B 49.9 D 15.1 B Intersection Delay, s/veh / LOS 38.7 D Multimodal Results EB WB NB SB Pedestrian LOS Score / LOS 2.3 B 2.1 B 2.8 C 2.8 C Bicycle LOS Score / LOS 1.3 A 1.0 A 1.8 A 0.5 A Copyright © 2017 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved. HCS 2010™ Streets Version 6.90 Generated: 1/18/2017 8:53:59 AM 130 South Howie Street Helena, Montana 59601 406-459-1443 March 8, 2017 Matt Hausauer C&H Engineering 1091 Stoneridge Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 RE: East Main Development Access Dear Matt, it is my understanding that the developers of East Main Development in Bozeman have reached an agreement with an adjacent property owner to use the existing approach into the Buggy Bath carwash to provide access to the East Main Development. This approach is currently one of three approaches for the Buggy Bath carwash and also provides access to the five residential homes north of the carwash. These homes are planned for demolition in Phase I of the East Main Development. With access to the Buggy Bath car wash approach, the new approach onto Main Street proposed as part of the East Main development is no longer necessary. The overall projected traffic volumes at the carwash approach would be largely the same as the previously proposed access and would have the same operational characteristics as described in the January 2017 TIS produced for this project. The TIS suggested that the approach would function at LOS C with the proposed development. A review provided by MDT dated February 22, 2017 for the original TIS provided preliminary approval for the new access location but also requested the closure of the existing approach on the western edge of the property. The proposed development is required to have two means of ingress/egress for emergency services. The new access proposal for the East Main Development will not create any new approaches or move any existing approaches on Main Street. With the new access plan, the developers plan to maintain the existing approach on the western edge of the property and are willing to sign the existing approach as right-in/out only. The existing Buggy Bath car wash approach is 20 ft wide and will be widened by 6 feet to provide efficient access to the East Main development. As suggested in the original TIS, it would be desirable for the developers to add separated southbound lanes at the access to maximize the capacity of the approach for future use. Sincerely, Bob Abelin, P.E. PTOE Abelin Traffic Services, Inc. CITY OF BOZEMAN HYDRANT PRESSURE/FLOW REQUEST FORM Date: 1/20/17 Location Hydrant # Static Pressure Pitot Pressure Residual Pressure E. Main / Cypress 211 124 115 E. Main East of Cypress 234 72 Requested By: Robert Blakeman Fax # Nozzle Size Flowed: 2.5” Done By: ES / AO Comments: 1425 GPM 1 Laura Dornberger From:Brian Heaston <bheaston@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent:Monday, January 09, 2017 9:58 AM To:Matt Hausauer Cc:Laura Dornberger; Shawn Kohtz Subject:RE: CIL Water Rights - East Main Project Hi Matt,    I’ll get you in the ballpark at this point and we can finalize at the time you’re ready to obtain FSP approval.  Irrigation  water is a sizeable component of the annual use, so the LA will need to perform an estimate of the irrigation water  requirement for each Phase.  This of course assumes that the public system is supplying the irrigation water and not a  well.  If a well is proposed, then you’ll need to provide a letter from the DNRC that water use for the  landscaping/irrigation system falls within the parameters of the exemption (35 gpm/10AF).     ‐ Annual water use for office bldgs is approximately 10,000 gal/1,000 ft^2 of space.    ‐ Annual water use for commercial retail is ~5,000 gal/1,000 ft^2 of space  ‐ If it’s restaurant space in the commercial area then use is ~150,000 gal/1,000 ft^2  ‐ MF residential is .124 AF/unit    CIL WR fee is $6k/AF    Fee estimates (note: does not account for irrigation water for landscape areas and assumes retail not restaurant for  commercial use).  Again, will finalize as the FSPs come through.    ‐ Bldg 1: 0.5 AF/yr => $3,000  ‐ Bldg 2: 0.8 AF/yr => $4,800  ‐ Bldg 3A: 0.7 AF/yr => $4,200  ‐ Bldg 3B: 0.5 AF/yr => $3,000  ‐ Bldg 4: 0.6 AF/yr => $3,600  .  Questions or concerns, let me know.    Brian    From: Matt Hausauer [mailto:mhausauer@chengineers.com] Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 4:18 PM To: Brian Heaston Cc: Laura Dornberger Subject: CIL Water Rights - East Main Project   Hi Brian,    We’re working on a new site plan for the East Main development that includes the existing Locati Building and Mountain  View Building (Langlas office). Can you provide the CIL of water rights calculations for each of the proposed buildings?  Phase 1 (Building 1) is the current priority.    Building 1: 17,118 SF – Office  Building 2: 5,000 SF Commercial and 15,000 SF Residential (6 two‐bedroom units)  2 Building 3A: 4,000 SF Commercial and 12,000 SF Residential (5 two‐bedroom units)  Building 3B: 16,000 SF Office  Building 4: 20,000 SF Office    Please let me know if you have any questions.    Thanks!    Matt Hausauer, P.E.  www.chengineers.com   "This message and/or attachment contains confidential information. Distribution of this information must be only to those of C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc employees or individuals contractually approved to receive this information. If you are not the addressee and/or are not authorized to receive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose,forward, print or take any action based on this message or any information herein. If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this message."   City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may  be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender  and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record  retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be  protected from disclosure under law. 1 Laura Dornberger Subject:Bozeman Site Plan - East Main From: Strasheim, Kerri [mailto:kstrasheim@mt.gov]   Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 12:18 PM  To: Matt Hausauer <mhausauer@chengineers.com>  Cc: Laura Dornberger <ldornberger@LocatiArchitects.com>; Lain Leoniak <LLeoniak@BOZEMAN.NET>  Subject: RE: Bozeman Site Plan ‐ East Main    Matt – Thank you for your patience – we have been busy. I have reviewed your request. Per the information provided in your emails on January 9, 2017, the proposed water use for Lot 2C of Plat C-23- A21 of the Northern Pacific Addition will not exceed 10 acre-feet (AF). The proposed new use is for approximately 0.5 AF of lawn and garden irrigation, for up to 1.25 AF. This lot falls under the 1993 rule for combined appropriations. The new well cannot exceed a diversion rate of 35 gallons per minute (GPM) or 10 AF. No water right permitting is required ahead of time. In Clark Fork Coalition, et. al. v. DNRC, et. al., 2016 MT 229, 384 Mont. 503, 380 P.3d 771, the Montana Supreme Court concluded that the definition of “combined appropriation” in Admin. R. Mont. 36.12.101(13) was invalid. The Court reinstated the Department’s 1987 Rule defining “combined appropriation” as: “An appropriation of water from the same source aquifer by means of two or more groundwater developments, the purpose of which, in the department’s judgment, could have been accomplished by a single appropriation. Groundwater developments need not be physically connected nor have a common distribution system to be considered a “combined appropriation.” They can be separate developed springs or wells to separate parts of a project or development. Such wells and springs need not be developed simultaneously. They can be developed gradually or in increments. The amount of water appropriated from the entire project or development from these groundwater developments in the same source aquifer is the “combined appropriation.” Under this Rule, the Department interprets subdivisions that are pending before the Department of Environmental Quality for approval on October 17, 2014 or filed after that date to be a single project that can be accomplished by a single appropriation. Consequently all wells in such a subdivision will be considered a “combined appropriation” for the purposes of Mont. Code Ann. 85-2-306. The only exception to this interpretation is that a subdivision which has received preliminary plat approval prior to October 17, 2014 will not be considered a project under the “combined appropriation” 1987 Rule; individual lots will still be evaluated under the 1987 Rule at the time of an application to the Department. 2015 Mont. Laws § 1, Ch. 221. This does not serve as a pre-approval for a water right. Thank you, Kerri ___________________ Kerri Strasheim Regional Manager DNRC Water Resources - Bozeman 2273 Boot Hill Court, Suite 110 Bozeman, MT 59715 2 Ph: 406-556-4504 Fax: 406-587-9726 kstrasheim@mt.gov    EXISTING UTILITESEXISTING UTILITES a C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS: STORMTECH MC-3500 CHAMBER SYSTEMSPLEASE NOTE:1. THE LISTED AASHTO DESIGNATIONS ARE FOR GRADATIONS ONLY. THE STONE MUST ALSO BE CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR. FOR EXAMPLE, A SPECIFICATION FOR #4 STONE WOULD STATE: "CLEAN, CRUSHED,ANGULAR NO. 4 (AASHTO M43) STONE".2. STORMTECH COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS ARE MET FOR 'A' LOCATION MATERIALS WHEN PLACED AND COMPACTED IN 9" (230 mm) (MAX) LIFTS USING TWO FULL COVERAGES WITH A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR.3. WHERE INFILTRATION SURFACES MAY BE COMPROMISED BY COMPACTION, FOR STANDARD DESIGN LOAD CONDITIONS, A FLAT SURFACE MAY BE ACHIEVED BY RAKING OR DRAGGING WITHOUT COMPACTIONEQUIPMENT. FOR SPECIAL LOAD DESIGNS, CONTACT STORMTECH FOR COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS.NOTES:1. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM F2418 "STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR POLYPROPYLENE (PP) CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".2. MC-3500 CHAMBERS SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM F2787 "STANDARD PRACTICE FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF THERMOPLASTIC CORRUGATED WALL STORMWATER COLLECTION CHAMBERS".3. "ACCEPTABLE FILL MATERIALS" TABLE ABOVE PROVIDES MATERIAL LOCATIONS, DESCRIPTIONS, GRADATIONS, AND COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS FOR FOUNDATION, EMBEDMENT, AND FILL MATERIALS.4. THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE BEARING RESISTANCE (ALLOWABLE BEARING CAPACITY) OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS AND THE DEPTH OF FOUNDATION STONE WITHCONSIDERATION FOR THE RANGE OF EXPECTED SOIL MOISTURE CONDITIONS.PERIMETER STONE MUST BE EXTENDED HORIZONTALLY TO THE EXCAVATION WALL FOR BOTH VERTICAL AND SLOPED EXCAVATION WALLS.5. ONCE LAYER 'C' IS PLACED, ANY SOIL/MATERIAL CAN BE PLACED IN LAYER 'D' UP TO THE FINISHED GRADE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE SOILS CAN BE USED TO REPLACE THE MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAYER 'C'OR 'D' AT THE SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S DISCRETION.MATERIAL LOCATIONDESCRIPTIONAASHTO MATERIALCLASSIFICATIONSCOMPACTION / DENSITYREQUIREMENTDFINAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'D' STARTSFROM THE TOP OF THE 'C' LAYER TO THE BOTTOMOF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT OR UNPAVED FINISHEDGRADE ABOVE. NOTE THAT PAVEMENT SUBBASEMAY BE PART OF THE 'D' LAYERANY SOIL/ROCK MATERIALS, NATIVE SOILS, OR PERENGINEER'S PLANS. CHECK PLANS FOR PAVEMENTSUBGRADE REQUIREMENTS.N/APREPARE PER SITE DESIGN ENGINEER'S PLANS.PAVED INSTALLATIONS MAY HAVE STRINGENTMATERIAL AND PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS.CINITIAL FILL: FILL MATERIAL FOR LAYER 'C'STARTS FROM THE TOP OF THE EMBEDMENTSTONE ('B' LAYER) TO 24" (600 mm) ABOVE THETOP OF THE CHAMBER. NOTE THAT PAVEMENTSUBBASE MAY BE A PART OF THE 'C' LAYER.GRANULAR WELL-GRADED SOIL/AGGREGATE MIXTURES, <35%FINES OR PROCESSED AGGREGATE. MOST PAVEMENT SUBBASE MATERIALS CAN BE USED IN LIEUOF THIS LAYER.AASHTO M145¹A-1, A-2-4, A-3ORAASHTO M43¹3, 357, 4, 467, 5, 56, 57, 6, 67, 68, 7, 78, 8, 89,9, 10BEGIN COMPACTIONS AFTER 24" (600 mm) OFMATERIAL OVER THE CHAMBERS IS REACHED.COMPACT ADDITIONAL LAYERS IN 12" (300 mm)MAX LIFTS TO A MIN. 95% PROCTOR DENSITY FORWELL GRADED MATERIAL AND 95% RELATIVEDENSITY FOR PROCESSED AGGREGATEMATERIALS.BEMBEDMENT STONE: FILL SURROUNDING THECHAMBERS FROM THE FOUNDATION STONE ('A'LAYER) TO THE 'C' LAYER ABOVE.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONEAASHTO M43¹3, 4AFOUNDATION STONE: FILL BELOW CHAMBERSFROM THE SUBGRADE UP TO THE FOOT (BOTTOM)OF THE CHAMBER.CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONEAASHTO M43¹3, 4PLATE COMPACT OR ROLL TO ACHIEVE A FLATSURFACE. ² ³45"(1140 mm)24"(600 mm) MIN*8'(2.4 m)MAX12" (300 mm) TYP77" (1950 mm)ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601T NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE ALLAROUND CLEAN, CRUSHED, ANGULAR STONE IN A & B LAYERSSUBGRADE SOILS(SEE NOTE 4)PAVEMENT LAYER (DESIGNEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER)MC-3500END CAP12" (300 mm) MIN9"(230 mm) MINDEPTH OF STONE TO BE DETERMINEDBY SITE DESIGN ENGINEER 9" (230 mm) MINDCBA*TO BOTTOM OF FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT. FOR UNPAVEDINSTALLATIONS WHERE RUTTING FROM VEHICLES MAY OCCUR,INCREASE COVER TO 30" (750 mm).PERIMETER STONE(SEE NOTE 6)EXCAVATION WALL(CAN BE SLOPED OR VERTICAL)6" (150 mm) MINNO COMPACTION REQUIRED.*FOR COVER DEPTHS GREATER THAN 8.0' (2.4 m) PLEASE CONTACT STORMTECHPART #STUBBCMC3500IEPP06T6" (150 mm)33.21" (844 mm)---MC3500IEPP06B---0.66" (17 mm)MC3500IEPP08T8" (200 mm)31.16" (791 mm)---MC3500IEPP08B---0.81" (21 mm)MC3500IEPP10T10" (250 mm)29.04" (738 mm)---MC3500IEPP10B---0.93" (24 mm)MC3500IEPP12T12" (300 mm)26.36" (670 mm)---MC3500IEPP12B---1.35" (34 mm)MC3500IEPP15T15" (375 mm)23.39" (594 mm)---MC3500IEPP15B---1.50" (38 mm)MC3500IEPP18TC18" (450 mm)20.03" (509 mm)---MC3500IEPP18BC---1.77" (45 mm)MC3500IEPP24TC24" (600 mm)14.48" (368 mm)---MC3500IEPP24BC---2.06" (52 mm)MC3500IEPP30BC30" (750 mm)---NOMINAL CHAMBER SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH)77.0" X 45.0" X 86.0" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 2184 mm)CHAMBER STORAGE109.9 CUBIC FEET (3.11 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE*178.9 CUBIC FEET (5.06 m³)WEIGHT135.0 lbs.(61.2 kg)NOMINAL END CAP SPECIFICATIONSSIZE (W X H X INSTALLED LENGTH)77.0" X 45.0" X 22.5" (1956 mm X 1143 mm X 571 mm)END CAP STORAGE14.9 CUBIC FEET (0.42 m³)MINIMUM INSTALLED STORAGE*46.0 CUBIC FEET (1.30 m³)WEIGHT50.0 lbs.(22.7 kg)*ASSUMES 12" (305 mm) STONE ABOVE, 9" (229 mm) STONE FOUNDATION AND BETWEEN CHAMBERS,12" (305 mm) STONE PERIMETER IN FRONT OF END CAPS AND 40% STONE POROSITYMC-3500 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONNTS90.0" (2286 mm)ACTUAL LENGTH86.0" (2184 mm)INSTALLEDBUILD ROW IN THIS DIRECTIONNOTE: ALL DIMENSIONS ARE NOMINALCUSTOM PRECORED INVERTS ARE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. INVENTORIED MANIFOLDS INCLUDE12-24" (300-600 mm) SIZE ON SIZE AND 15-48" (375-1200 mm) ECCENTRIC MANIFOLDS.CUSTOM INVERT LOCATIONS ON THE MC-3500 END CAP CUT IN THE FIELD ARE NOT RECOMMENDEDFOR PIPE SIZES GREATER THAN 10" (250 mm)THE INVERT LOCATION IN COLUMN 'B' ARE THE HIGHTEST POSSIBLE FOR THE PIPE SIZE.LOWER JOINTCORRUGATIONWEBCRESTCRESTSTIFFENING RIBVALLEYSTIFFENING RIBBC77.0"(1956 mm)45.0"(1143 mm)25.7"(653 mm)FOOT77.0"(1956 mm)45.0"(1143 mm)STUBS AT BOTTOM OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "B"STUBS AT TOP OF END CAP FOR PART NUMBERS ENDING WITH "T"UPPER JOINT CORRUGATION22.5"(571 mm)INSTALLEDINSPECTION & MAINTENANCESTEP 1) INSPECT ISOLATOR ROW FOR SEDIMENTA. INSPECTION PORTS (IF PRESENT)A.1. REMOVE/OPEN LID ON NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAINA.2. REMOVE AND CLEAN FLEXSTORM FILTER IF INSTALLEDA.3. USING A FLASHLIGHT AND STADIA ROD, MEASURE DEPTH OF SEDIMENT AND RECORD ON MAINTENANCE LOGA.4. LOWER A CAMERA INTO ISOLATOR ROW FOR VISUAL INSPECTION OF SEDIMENT LEVELS (OPTIONAL)A.5. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.B. ALL ISOLATOR ROWSB.1. REMOVE COVER FROM STRUCTURE AT UPSTREAM END OF ISOLATOR ROWB.2. USING A FLASHLIGHT, INSPECT DOWN THE ISOLATOR ROW THROUGH OUTLET PIPEi) MIRRORS ON POLES OR CAMERAS MAY BE USED TO AVOID A CONFINED SPACE ENTRYii) FOLLOW OSHA REGULATIONS FOR CONFINED SPACE ENTRY IF ENTERING MANHOLEB.3. IF SEDIMENT IS AT, OR ABOVE, 3" (80 mm) PROCEED TO STEP 2. IF NOT, PROCEED TO STEP 3.STEP 2) CLEAN OUT ISOLATOR ROW USING THE JETVAC PROCESSA. A FIXED CULVERT CLEANING NOZZLE WITH REAR FACING SPREAD OF 45" (1.1 m) OR MORE IS PREFERREDB. APPLY MULTIPLE PASSES OF JETVAC UNTIL BACKFLUSH WATER IS CLEANC. VACUUM STRUCTURE SUMP AS REQUIREDSTEP 3) REPLACE ALL COVERS, GRATES, FILTERS, AND LIDS; RECORD OBSERVATIONS AND ACTIONS.STEP 4) INSPECT AND CLEAN BASINS AND MANHOLES UPSTREAM OF THE STORMTECH SYSTEM.NOTES1. INSPECT EVERY 6 MONTHS DURING THE FIRST YEAR OF OPERATION. ADJUST THE INSPECTION INTERVAL BASED ON PREVIOUSOBSERVATIONS OF SEDIMENT ACCUMULATION AND HIGH WATER ELEVATIONS.2. CONDUCT JETTING AND VACTORING ANNUALLY OR WHEN INSPECTION SHOWS THAT MAINTENANCE IS NECESSARY.SUMP DEPTH TBD BYSITE DESIGN ENGINEER(24" [600 mm] MIN RECOMMENDED)24" (600 mm) HDPE ACCESS PIPE REQUIREDUSE FACTORY PRE-CORED END CAPPART #: MC3500IEPP24BCTWO LAYERS OF ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 315WTM WOVENGEOTEXTILE BETWEEN FOUNDATION STONE AND CHAMBERS8.25' (2.51 m) MIN WIDE CONTINUOUS FABRIC WITHOUT SEAMSCATCH BASINORMANHOLECOVER PIPE CONNECTION TO ENDCAP WITH ADS GEOSYNTHETICS 601TNON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILEMC-3500 CHAMBERMC-3500 END CAPMC-3500 ISOLATOR ROW DETAILNTSOPTIONAL INSPECTION PORTSTORMTECH HIGHLY RECOMMENDSFLEXSTORM PURE INSERTS IN ANY UPSTREAMSTRUCTURES WITH OPEN GRATES18" (450 mm) MIN WIDTHPAVEMENTMC-3500 6" INSPECTION PORT DETAILNTSCONCRETE COLLARMC-3500 CHAMBERCONCRETE SLAB8" (200 mm) MIN THICKNESS12" (300 mm) NYLOPLAST INLINEDRAIN BODY W/SOLID HINGEDCOVER OR GRATEPART# 2712AG6IP*SOLID COVER: 1299CGC*GRATE: 1299CGSCONCRETE COLLAR NOT REQUIREDFOR UNPAVED APPLICATIONS6" (150 mm) PVC SCH40 PIPE(BY OTHERS)FLEXSTORM CATCH ITPART# 6212NYFXWITH USE OF OPEN GRATE6" (150 mm) INSERTA TEEPART# 6IPSSTIP*INSERTA TEE TO BE CENTERED INVALLEY OF CORRUGATIONS* THE PART# 2712AG6IPKIT CAN BEUSED TO ORDER ALL NECESSARYCOMPONENTS FOR A SOLID LIDINSPECTION PORT INSTALLATIONC & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING 24"x 36"http://www.usa.lighting.philips.comindoorlighting.applications@philips.comoutdoorlighting.applications@philips.comProject #:Created By:Revision #:Size:Date:Page #:Project:Agent:Specifier:ARCH D3/20/17Page 1 of 1DescriptionR1R2R3R4R5.........................Rev. Date.........................Rev. #The calculations set forth herein are based on project specifications provided to PHILIPS.  Actual ormeasured values may differ from forecasted results due to tolerances in calculation methods, testingprocedures, component procedures, component performance, measurement techniques and varyingfield conditions such as, but not limited to, line voltage, temperature, atmospheric/environmentalconditions and improper or undocumented lamp burn‐in procedures.  Further, room dimensions,reflectances, furniture andarchitectural elements within the space may significantly affect calculations.Verification of the calculations herein, including design acceptability, and compliance with anyapplicable lighting codes is not the responsibility of PHILIPS, and shall be the responsibility of thearchitect, owner, or owners representative, as applicable. Please refer to Luminaire Schedule for lightloss factor (LLF) details used in the calculations.DisclaimerR. Johnstone18323‐00195 Locati East Main ‐ Bozeman, MTTom Craver ‐ Northern Rockies AgencyRob Rohe - Locati ArchitectsR1Scale: 1 inch= 20 Ft.549101019 E MAIN ST55410955103512' BUILDING SETBACK FROM TOP OF BANKTOP OF BANK10' SETBACKmountain view buildingJBL LLCC9CB‐2ZONINGSS8" SSEXIST SEWER SERVICE, ALONG TOP OF BANKB‐2ZONINGCCSSCCCTOP OF BANKLOT 1A‐131,302 SF0.7185 ACLOT 13A104,878 SF2.40766 ACLOT 2CLOT 2B43,192 SF0.9915 ACCCCexisting998106PHASE 1PHASE 4PHASE 2910766101079FUTUREMIXED USE building 23 STORY5,000 SF COMM.15,000 SF RES22 REQ'D PARKING SPACES3 STO4,000 SF C12,000 SF20 REQ'D S552 STORY17,147 SF TOTAL58 REQ'D SPACES61 SPACES PROVIDED(2 ACCESSIBLE)proposed office building 1PHASE 366510PlazaPlazaPlaza54 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED29 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED6 GARAGE SPACES PROVIDED61 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED64 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED5 GARAGE SPACES PROVIDEDvillage investment groupR‐OZONING666CCCA1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.25A1.5.5.5.25.25.250.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.1 0.8 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.2 1.9 2.5 2.2 1.5 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.6 1.3 2.0 2.6 2.4 1.7 1.0 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.0 2.0 3.2 4.4 3.9 2.5 1.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 0.9 1.9 3.3 4.6 4.3 2.7 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.2 2.5 4.4 6.2 4.6 3.2 1.7 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 1.0 2.4 4.3 6.1 4.8 3.5 1.9 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.1 2.3 3.9 4.6 4.8 2.9 1.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 1.0 2.1 3.6 4.6 4.8 2.9 1.6 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.6 2.5 3.2 2.9 1.9 1.1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.2 0.7 1.4 2.3 3.0 2.8 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.9 1.3 1.7 1.5 1.0 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.5 1.4 1.1 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.9 2.0 1.5 0.9 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.6 1.4 2.4 3.5 3.6 2.6 1.6 0.7 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.7 1.9 3.4 4.7 5.0 3.8 2.1 0.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.8 2.0 3.5 4.8 5.1 3.9 2.2 1.0 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.9 1.6 2.5 3.6 3.9 2.9 2.0 1.3 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.10.0 0.1 0.5 1.0 1.5 1.9 1.8 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.5 2.0 2.2 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 1.7 1.2 1.0 1.1 1.4 1.9 1.8 1.3 0.8 0.3 0.10.0 0.2 0.8 1.7 2.7 3.6 3.2 2.2 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.8 1.1 1.6 2.3 3.2 3.7 3.0 2.0 1.7 1.8 2.5 3.4 3.3 2.2 1.3 0.5 0.10.0 0.2 1.0 2.3 4.0 5.0 4.6 3.1 1.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.5 2.8 4.7 5.2 4.6 2.8 2.3 2.4 3.7 4.8 4.6 3.3 1.8 0.7 0.10.0 0.2 1.1 2.4 4.1 5.5 4.6 3.2 1.8 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.4 2.8 4.6 5.9 4.6 2.9 2.3 2.5 4.0 5.3 4.8 3.5 1.9 0.7 0.10.0 0.2 0.9 1.8 2.9 4.0 3.6 2.3 1.3 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.3 1.1 2.1 3.3 4.1 3.3 2.2 1.9 2.0 2.8 4.0 3.8 2.5 1.5 0.6 0.10.0 0.1 0.5 1.1 1.7 2.2 2.0 1.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.7 1.3 1.9 2.2 1.9 1.4 1.1 1.2 1.7 2.2 2.1 1.5 0.9 0.4 0.10.0 0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.60.0 0.0 0.1 0.00.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.10.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.00.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.00.9 1.4 1.5 1.2 0.8 0.5 0.1 0.01.8 2.7 3.0 2.4 1.5 0.8 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.5 1.5 2.7 4.6 4.6 3.8 2.2 1.1 0.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.4 1.7 3.2 4.6 6.6 4.5 2.6 1.2 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.4 1.4 2.5 4.2 4.6 3.5 2.1 1.0 0.2 0.00.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 1.6 2.4 2.7 2.1 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.00.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 0.8 1.1 1.3 1.0 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.00.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Luminaire ScheduleProject:  Locati East Main ‐ Bozeman, MTSymbolQtyLabelArrangementManufacturerDescriptionArr. WattsLum. WattsLum. LumensLLFBUG Rating 7A1SINGLEPHILIPS LIGHTING, LITTLESTOWNCXF1464‐G2‐5N7‐16  on 12' pole136.5136.5129740.850B4‐U0‐G2Calculation SummaryLabelAvgMaxMinAvg/MinMax/MinCalcTypeUnitsGrid Size (Ft.)Grid Height (Ft.)# PtsAll points1.046.60.0N.A.N.A.IlluminanceFc100729Phase I Parking Area1.496.100.00N.A.N.A.IlluminanceFc279Phase I Parking AreaIlluminance (Fc)Average = 1.49Maximum = 6.10Minimum = 0.00Avg/Min Ratio = N.A.Max/Min Ratio = N.A.No. Points = 279 C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ””C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING ””C & H ENGINEERING MILLENIUM ENGINEERING AMES ENGINEERING COFFMAN ENGINEERING Type: Model: Project: www.intrigueled.com N60 W14592 Kaul Avenue Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 P: (877) 965 0005 F: (262) 436 1745 EPIC L E D W a l l M o u n t shown with shepherds crook wall mount General: The classic contemporary style of the Epic blends well into a variety of architectural styles, both past and present. Appropriate for pedestrian scale installations, the varied mounting and top options provide an aesthetic appeal. Construction: Top, housing, and mounting gear are constructed of low copper content cast aluminum. Shade shall be spun aluminum. Stainless steel external hardware to protect against the exterior elements. Lens: Glass globe available in opal (-OL) or clear (-CL). Tops: Two top styles available: Cone (straight arm only) and Dome. LED Light Engine: LED module located in upper housing with LED module offering 37 nominal input watts. Available in color temperatures of 3000K, 3500K, 4000K, and 5000K. Minimum CRI = 80. Driver: Constant current LED driver; input voltage of 120v to 277v, mounted internal to fixture. Heat Sink: Finned heat sink shall be extruded aluminum and shall be located in housing above LED module. Mounting: Two wall mount styles available: straight arm and shepherds crook. Finish: Textured polyester powder coat finish. Shade underside is standard white finish. Black, bronze, grey, white, silver, and verde green options available. For custom colors, please consult factory. Gaskets: EPDM gaskets standard. Weight: WA 28 lbs WAS 27 lbs Listings: ETL Listed to UL 8750. IESNA LM79. Type: Model: Project: www.intrigueled.com N60 W14592 Kaul Avenue Menomonee Falls, WI 53051 P: (877) 965 0005 F: (262) 436 1745 F I X T U R E D E T A I L IES files can be found on website. Content of specification sheets is subject to change. Please consult website for current product detail. ☐ WA Straight Arm Wall Mount ☐ WAS Wall Arm Shepherds Crook Mount MOUNTING ☐ CL Clear Glass Globe ☐ OL Opal/Translucent Glass Globe ☐ UNV 120v – 277v; output current 700mA ☐ BLK Black finish ☐ BRZ Bronze finish ☐ GRY Grey finish ☐ SIL Silver finish LENS FINISH ☐ 30K 3000K ☐ 35K 3500K ☐ 40K 4000K ☐ 50K 5000K COLOR (kelvin) VOLTAGE WATTAGE ☐ C Cone ☐ D Dome TOP STYLE SERIES MOUNTING WATTAGE CCT (kelvin) TOP STYLE LENS VOLTAGE FINISH ------- ☐ EC Epic Wall Mount SERIES ☐ VGN Verde Green finish ☐ WHT White finish ☐ CC Custom Color – consult factory ☐ WGF Woodgrain finish – consult factory ☐ 37LED 37 input watts 3,700 100 3000 3,750 101 3500 3,750 101 4000 3,800 103 5000 37 > 80 50,000 hrs 700mA 48.0 Inverted available with WLU option only. WSR LED Series Light Engines Performance Package Distribution Voltage Mounting Options3 Finish (required) WSR LED 1 One engine (10 LEDs) 2 Two engines (20 LEDs) 700 mA options: 10A700/30K 3000K 10A700/40K 4000K 10A700/50K 5000K SR2 Type II SR3 Type III SR4 Type IV MVOLT 1 120 1 208 1 240 1 277 1 347 480 Shipped included (blank)Surface mount Shipped separately 2 BBW Surface-mounted back box UT5 Uptilt 5 degrees Shipped installed PE Photoelectric cell, button type 4, 5 SF Single fuse (120, 277, 347V) 4 DF Double fuse (208, 240, 480V) 4 DMG 0-10V dimming driver (no controls) ELCW Emergency battery backup 6 WLU Wet location door for up orientation 7 PIR Motion/ambient light sensor 8 DS Dual switching 9 SPD Separate surge protection 10 Shipped separately VG Vandal guard WG Wire guard DDBXD Dark bronze DBLXD Black DNAXD Natural aluminum DWHXD White DSSXD Sandstone DDBTXD Textured dark bronze DBLBXD Textured black DNATXD Textured natural aluminum DWHGXD Textured white DSSTXD Textured sandstone WSR LED Architectural Wall Sconce Luminaire Ordering Information EXAMPLE: WSR LED 2 10A700/40K SR3 MVOLT DDBTXD Catalog Number Notes Type Height:7-1/4” (18.4 cm) Width:18” (45.7 cm) Depth:9” (22.8 cm) Weight: 17 lbs(7.7 kg) One Lithonia Way • Conyers, Georgia 30012 • Phone: 800.279.8041 • www.lithonia.com © 2011-2016 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All rights reserved. Hit the Tab key or mouse over the page to see all interactive elements. Optional Back Box (BBW) Height:4” (10.2 cm) Width:5-1/2” (14.0 cm) Depth:1-1/2” (3.8 cm) 5-1/2 4 1-1/2 WALL SCONCE BBW (Back Box Wall) MOUNTING H W 5-1/2 4 1-1/2 WALL SCONCE BBW (Back Box Wall) MOUNTING DFor 3/4” NPT side-entry conduit Specifications Introduction The classic Architectural Wall Sconce is now available with the latest in LED technology. The result is a long-life, maintenance-free product with typical energy savings of 75% compared to metal halide versions. The integral battery backup option provides emergency egress lighting, without the use of a back-box or remote gear, so installations maintain their aesthetic integrity. The WSR LED is ideal for replacing existing 50 – 175W metal halide wall-mounted products. The expected service life is 20+ years of nighttime use. W H D NOTES 1 MVOLT driver operates on any line voltage from 120-277V (50/60 Hz). Specify 120, 208, 240 or 277 options only when ordering with photocell (PE), fusing (SF, DF), or dual switching (DS). 2 May also be ordered separately as an accessory. Ex: WSBBW DDBXD U. Must specify finish. 3 Must be ordered with fixture; cannot be field installed. 4 Not available with MVOLT option. Button photocell (PE) can be ordered with a dedicated voltage option. Single fuse (SF) requires 120, 277 or 347 voltage option. Double fuse (DF) requires 208, 240 or 480 voltage option. 5 Not available with 480V option. Not available with motion/ambient light sensor (PIR). 6 Integral battery pack is rated for -20° to 60°C operating temperature. ELCW warranty is 3-year period. Not available with 347V or 480V. Not available with WLU. Not available with ELCW. 7 WLU not available with PIR or ELCW. 8 Specifies the SensorSwitch SFOD-7-ODP control (photocell included); see Motion Sensor Guide for details. Includes ambient light sensor. Not available with “PE” option (button type photocell). Dimming driver standard. Not available with WLU, VG or WG. 9 Provides 50/50 luminaire operation via two independent drivers and light engines on two separate circuits. Not available with one engine, MVOLT, ELCW, WLU, SF, or DF. Must specify voltage; voltage must be the same for both drivers. When ordered with photocell (PE) or motion sensor (PIR), only the primary power source leads will be controlled. 10 See electrical section on page 2 for more details. The emergency battery backup (ELCW option) is integral to the luminaire - no external housing required! This design provides reliable emergency operation while maintaining the aesthetics of the product. All ELCW configurations include an independent secondary driver with an integral relay to immediately detect AC power loss. Dual light engines are wired in parallel so both engines operate in emergency mode and provide additional component redundancy. These design features meet various interpretations of NFPA 70/NEC 2008 - 700.16 The emergency battery will power the luminaire for a minimum duration of 90 minutes (maximum duration of three hours) from the time supply power is lost, per International Building Code Section 1006 and NFPA 101 Life Safety Code Section 7.9, provided luminaires are mounted at an appropriate height and illuminate an open space with no major obstructions. The examples below show illuminance of 1 fc average and 0.1 fc minimum of the single-engine Type IV product in emergency mode. WST LED 1 10A700/40K SR4 MVOLT ELCW 10’ x 10’ Gridlines 8’ and 12’ Mounting Height Emergency Battery Operation 8’ MH 12’ MH WSR-LED Rev. 10/06/16 1 See electrical load chart for 347/480V system watts. Light Engines Drive Current (mA) Performance Package System Watts (MVOLT1) Dist. Type 40K (4000K, 70 CRI) Nominal Lumens B U G LPW 1 (10 LEDs)700 10A700/--K 24W SR2 2,005 1 0 1 84 SR3 2,029 1 0 1 84 SR4 1,959 1 0 1 82 2 (20 LEDs)700 10A700/--K 47W SR2 3,944 1 0 1 84 SR3 4,028 1 0 1 86 SR4 3,851 1 0 1 82 Lumen values are from photometric tests performed in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08. Data is considered to be representative of the configurations shown, within the tolerances allowed by Lighting Facts. To see complete photometric reports or download .ies files for this product, visit Lithonia Lighting’s WSR LED homepage. Performance Data Photometric Diagrams FEATURES & SPECIFICATIONS INTENDED USE The classic architectural shape of the WSR LED was designed for applications such as hospitals, schools, malls, restaurants, and commercial buildings. The long life LEDs and driver make this luminaire nearly maintenance-free. CONSTRUCTION The single-piece die-cast aluminum housing integrates secondary heat sinks to optimize thermal transfer from the internal light engine heat sinks and promote long life. The driver is mounted in direct contact with the casting for a low operating temperature and long life. The die-cast door frame is fully gasketed with a one-piece solid silicone gasket to keep out moisture and dust, providing an IP65 rating for the luminaire. FINISH Exterior parts are protected by a zinc-infused Super Durable TGIC thermoset powder coat finish that provides superior resistance to corrosion and weathering. A tightly controlled multi-stage process ensures a minimum 3 mils thickness for a finish that can withstand extreme climate changes without cracking or peeling. Standard Super Durable colors include dark bronze, black, natural aluminum, sandstone and white. Available in textured and non-textured finishes. OPTICS Precision-molded acrylic lenses are engineered for superior distribution, uniformity, and spacing in wall-mount applications. Light engines are 4000K (70 CRI). The WSR LED has zero uplight and qualifies as a Nighttime Friendly™ product, meaning it is consistent with the LEED® and Green Globes™ criteria for eliminating wasteful uplight. ELECTRICAL Light engine(s) consist of 10 high-efficacy LEDs mounted to a metal core circuit board and integral aluminum heat sinks to maximize heat dissipation and promote long life (100,000 hrs at 25°C, L77). Class 2 electronic driver has a power factor >90%, THD <20%. The electronic driver has a power factor of >90%, THD <20%, and a minimum 2.5 KV surge protection. When ordering the SPD option, a separate surge protection device is installed within the luminaire which meets a minimum Category C low operation (per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2). INSTALLATION A universal mounting plate with integral mounting support arms allows the fixture to hinge down for easy access while making wiring connections. LISTINGS CSA certified to U.S. and Canadian standards. Light engines are IP66 rated; luminaire is IP65 rated and suitable for wet locations when mounted with the lenses down. WLU option offers wet location listing in “up”orientation. Rated for -30°C minimum ambient. DesignLights Consortium® (DLC) qualified product. Not all versions of this product may be DLC qualified. Please check the DLC Qualified Products List at www.designlights.org to confirm which versions are qualified. WARRANTY 5-year limited warranty. Complete warranty terms located at: www.acuitybrands.com/CustomerResources/Terms_and_conditions.aspx. Note: Actual performance may differ as a result of end-user environment and application. All values are design or typical values, measured under laboratory conditions at 25 °C. Specifications subject to change without notice. One Lithonia Way • Conyers, Georgia 30012 • Phone: 800.279.8041 • www.lithonia.com © 2011-2016 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. All rights reserved. WSR-LED Rev. 10/06/16 Lumen Output 1 Higher wattage is due to electrical losses from step-down transformer. Current (A) Light Engines Drive Current (mA)System Watts 120 208 240 277 347 480 1 700 24W 0.24 0.14 0.12 0.1 - - 29W 1 - - - -0.09 0.07 2 700 47W 0.44 0.27 0.23 0.20 - - 53W 1 - - - - 0.17 0.12 Electrical Load Isofootcandle plots for the WSR LED 2 10A700/40K SR2, SR3, and SR4. Distances are in units of mounting height (12’). Use these factors to determine relative lumen output for average ambient temperatures from 0-40°C (32-104°F). Lumen Ambient Temperature (LAT) Multipliers Ambient Lumen Multiplier 0°C 32°F 1.10 10°C 50°F 1.06 20°C 68°F 1.02 25°C 77°F 1.00 30°C 86°F 0.98 40°C 104°F 0.92 Projected LED Lumen Maintenance Data references the extrapolated performance projections for the WSR LED 2 10A700 platform in a 25°C ambient, based on 10,000 hours of LED testing (tested per IESNA LM-80-08 and projected per IESNA TM-21-11). To calculate LLF, use the lumen maintenance factor that corresponds to the desired number of operating hours below. For other lumen maintenance values, contact factory. Operating Hours 0 25,000 50,000 100,000 Lumen Maintenance Factor 1.0 0.94 0.88 0.77 LEGEND 0.1 fc 0.5 fc 1.0 fc Test No. 2489033-9 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR2 Test No. 2489033-8 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR3 Test No. 2489033-7 tested in accordance with IESNA LM-79-08.4 3 2 1 0 -4 -3 -2 -1 4 3 2 1 0 4321 SR4 Distribution overlay comparison to 175W metal halide. LEGEND WSR LED, 0.5 fc WSR HID, 0.5 fc 10’ W Sidewalk LLDs: WSR HID = 0.72 WSR LED = 0.95 WSR LED 2 10A700 40K SR4,WSR 175M FT Probe, 12’ Mounting Ht WSR HID:213W WSR LED:47W led 1 sr3 ELCW plan view Scale 1" = 40' 250 x 100' building 10' sidewalk 8' mtg ht over door contours at 1.0 fc (red) 0.5 fc (blue) on grade Calculated values include direct and interreflected components. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 1 of 5 Project: Location: Cat.No: Type: Lamps: Qty: Notes: Urban Westbrook CXF14 and CXF15 The Philips Hadco Westbrook pendant luminaires offer a simple and modern look but still traditional, providing style and performance to work in several urban applications including residential streets, city streets, campuses, parking lots and retail centers. These pendants use the latest LED technology which maximizes energy savings and provides uniform and comfortable light. CXF14 CXF15 Ordering guide: Luminaire Example: CXF15-32-G2-A-2-W-A-3-DA-AST-SP2-H-F Series LED's Generation G2 Finish Optics CCT Voltage Drive current CXF14 Westbrook CXF15 Westbrook 32 1 32 LEDs 48 48 LEDs 64 64 LEDs 80 2 80 LEDs G2 A Black B White G Verde H Bronze I Gray J Green 2 Type II 3 Type III 4 Type IV 5 Type V W 3000K N 4000K A 120-277 VAC B 1, 3 347-480 VAC 3 350mA 5 530 mA 7 2 700mA Ordering guide (continued)Optional programs Optional dimming 1st option 2nd option 3rd option Surge protection Luminaire options Spinning DA 4 Hrs 25% Reduction DB 4 Hrs 50% Reduction DC 4 Hrs 75% Reduction DD 6 Hrs 25% Reduction DE 6 Hrs 50% Reduction DF 6 Hrs 75% Reduction DG 8 Hrs 25% Reduction DH 8 Hrs 50% Reduction DJ 8 Hrs 75% Reduction DALI Compatible with DALI N No dimming AST Adjustable start up N No 1st option CLO Constant light output N No 2nd option OTL Over the life N No 3rd option SP1 10kV/20kA SP2 20Vk/20kA H House side shield N No options F Fluted spinning N No options Footnotes 1. 32 LED at 350mA and 530mA are not compatible with 347-480V. 2. Can't use 700mA with 80LED's. 3. 347-480V not compatible with optional dimming or optional programming. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 2 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire CXF15 Width:26" diameter Height:22-5/16" EPA:1.6 sq. ft Weight: (maximum)38 lbs (17.24 kg)22.27" (565mm) 26.00" (660mm) 22.27" (565mm) 26.00" (660mm) Dimensions CXF14 Width:21" diameter Height:22-5/16" EPA:1.6 sq. ft Weight: (maximum)38 lbs (17.24 kg)22.11" (561mm) 20.65" (524mm) 22.11" (561mm) 20.65" (524mm) Predicted Lumen Depreciation Data Ambient Temperature °C Driver mA Calculated L70 Hours L70 per TM-21 Lumen Maintenance % at 60,000 hrs 25°C 700 mA >100,000 hours >60,000 hours >87% Predicted performance derived from LED manufacturer’s data and engineering design estimates, based on IESNA LM-80 methodology. Actual experience may vary due to field application conditions.L70 is the predicted time when LED performance depreciates to 70% of initial lumen output. Calculated per IESNA TM21-11. Published L70 hours limited to 6 times actual LED test hours. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 3 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire LED Wattage and Lumen Values: Westbrook CXF14 / CXF15 4000K Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Ordering Code Total LEDs LED Current (mA) Average System Watts 1 Color Temp. Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating CXFxx32-G2-N3-16 32 350 35 4000K 4,134 117 B1-U0-G1 4,012 114 B1-U0-G1 3,913 111 B1-U0-G1 3,803 108 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-N5-16 32 530 51 4000K 5,850 114 B1-U0-G1 5,678 111 B1-U0-G1 5,537 108 B1-U0-G1 5,381 105 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-N7-16 32 700 71 4000K 7,671 109 B2-U0-G1 7,445 106 B1-U0-G2 7,260 103 B1-U0-G2 7,055 100 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-N3-16 48 350 52 4000K 5,994 116 B1-U0-G1 5,818 113 B1-U0-G1 5,673 110 B1-U0-G2 5,514 107 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-N5-16 48 530 75 4000K 8,483 113 B2-U0-G2 8,232 110 B2-U0-G2 8,028 107 B2-U0-G2 7,802 104 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-N7-16 48 700 103 4000K 11,122 108 B2-U0-G2 10,794 104 B2-U0-G2 10,526 102 B2-U0-G2 10,230 99 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N3-16 64 350 68 4000K 7,602 112 B2-U0-G1 7,378 108 B1-U0-G2 7,195 106 B1-U0-G2 6,993 103 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N5-16 64 530 99 4000K 10,758 109 B2-U0-G2 10,441 105 B2-U0-G2 10,182 103 B2-U0-G2 9,895 100 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-N7-16 64 700 137 4000K 14,106 103 B3-U0-G2 13,690 100 B2-U0-G2 13,350 98 B2-U0-G2 12,974 95 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-N3-16 80 350 87 4000K 10,214 117 B2-U0-G2 9,913 114 B2-U0-G2 9,667 111 B2-U0-G2 9,394 108 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-N5-16 80 530 127 4000K 14,453 114 B3-U0-G2 14,027 111 B2-U0-G2 13,679 108 B2-U0-G2 13,294 105 B4-U0-G2 LED Wattage and Lumen Values: Westbrook CXF14 / CXF15 (continued) 3000K Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Ordering Code Total LEDs LED Current (mA) Average System Watts 1 Color Temp. Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating Delivered Lumens 2 Efficacy (LPW) BUG Rating CXFxx32-G2-W3-16 32 350 35 3000K 3,618 103 B1-U0-G1 3,511 100 B1-U0-G1 3,424 97 B1-U0-G1 3,395 96 B2-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-W5-16 32 530 51 3000K 5,119 100 B1-U0-G1 4,968 97 B1-U0-G1 4,845 95 B1-U0-G1 4,708 92 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx32-G2-W7-16 32 700 71 3000K 6,712 95 B2-U0-G1 6,514 92 B1-U0-G1 6,352 90 B1-U0-G2 6,176 88 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-W3-16 48 350 52 3000K 5,245 102 B1-U0-G1 5,090 99 B1-U0-G1 4,964 96 B1-U0-G1 4,824 94 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx48-G2-W5-16 48 530 75 3000K 7,422 99 B2-U0-G1 7,203 96 B1-U0-G2 7,025 94 B1-U0-G2 6,827 91 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx48-G2-W7-16 48 700 103 3000K 9,732 94 B2-U0-G2 9,445 91 B2-U0-G2 9,210 89 B2-U0-G2 8,951 87 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-W3-16 64 350 68 3000K 6,652 98 B2-U0-G1 6,456 95 B1-U0-G1 6,296 92 B1-U0-G2 6,118 90 B3-U0-G1 CXFxx64-G2-W5-16 64 530 99 3000K 9,413 95 B2-U0-G2 9,136 92 B2-U0-G2 8,909 90 B2-U0-G2 8,658 87 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx64-G2-W7-16 64 700 137 3000K 12,342 90 B2-U0-G2 11,978 88 B2-U0-G2 11,681 86 B2-U0-G2 11,352 83 B4-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-W3-16 80 350 87 3000K 8,937 103 B2-U0-G2 8,673 100 B2-U0-G2 8,458 97 B2-U0-G2 8,220 94 B3-U0-G2 CXFxx80-G2-W5-16 80 530 127 3000K 12,647 100 B2-U0-G2 12,274 97 B2-U0-G2 11,969 94 B2-U0-G2 11,632 92 B4-U0-G2 1. System input wattage may vary based on input voltage, by up to +/- 10% , and based on manufacturer forward voltage, by up to +/- 8%. 2. Lumen values based on photometric tests performed in compliance with IESNA LM-79. Note: Some data may be scaled based on tests of similar, but not identical, luminaires. CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 4 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire Specifications: Housing In a round shape, this housing is constructed of low copper die-cast aluminum and 0.090" thick spun aluminum. All non-ferrous fasteners prevent corrosion and ensure longer life. Access-mechanism The hinged lens frame is cast aluminum with a stainless steel spring latch for tool-less access Mounting T:Top arm mount 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6A CXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4A CF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6ACXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4ACF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" Light engine LEDgine is composed of five main components: Heat Sink, Lens, LED lamp, Optical System, and Driver. Electrical components are RoHS compliant. LED module LED type Philips Lumileds LUXEON T.Composed of high-performance white LEDs. Color temperature as per ANSI/NEMA bin Neutral White, 4000 Kelvin nominal (3985K +/- 275K or 3710K to 4260K) or Warm White, 3000 Kelvin nominal (3045K +/- 175K or 2870K to 3220K), CRI 70 Min. 75 Typical. Heat sink Made of cast aluminum optimizing the LEDs efficiency and life. Product does not use any cooling device with moving parts (only passive cooling device). Finish Color in accordance with the AAMA 2603 standard. Application of polyester powder coat paint (4 mils/100 microns) with ± 1 mils / 24 microns of tolerance. The Thermosetting resins provides a discoloration resistant finish in accordance with the ASTM D2244 standard, as well as luster retention in keeping with the ASTM D523 standard and humidity proof in accordance with the ASTM D2247 standard. The surface treatment achieves a minimum of 2000 hours for salt spray resistant finish in accordance with testing performed and per ASTM B117 standard. Optical system (2) Type II, (3) Type III, (4) Type IV and (5) Type V are composed of high performance optical grade PMMA acrylic refractor lenses to achieve desired distribution optimized to get maximum spacing, target lumens and a superior lighting uniformity. Optical system is rated IP66. Performance shall be tested per LM 63, LM 79 and TM 15 (IESNA) certifying its photometric performance. Street side indicated. Driver Driver comes standard with dimming compatible 0-10V. High power factor of 95%. Electronic driver, operating range 50/60 Hz. Auto adjusting universal voltage input from 120 to 277 VAC rated for both application line to line or line to neutral, Class I, THD of 20% max. Maximum ambient operating temperature from 40°F (4°C) to 130°F (55°C). Certified in compliance to UL1310 cULus requirement (dry and damp location). Driver (continued) Assembled on a unitized removable tray with Tyco quick disconnect plug resisting to 221°F (105°C). The current supplying the LEDs will be reduced by the driver if the driver experiences internal overheating as a protection to the LEDs and the electrical components. Output is protected from short circuits, voltage overload and current overload. Automatic recovery after correction. Standard built in driver surge protection of 2.5kV (min). Driver options Optional programming 1 AST: Pre-set driver for progressive start-up of the LED module(s) to optimize energy management and enhance visual comfort at start-up. Optional programming 2 CLO: Pre-set driver to manage the lumen depreciation by adjusting the power given to the LEDs offering the same lighting intensity during the entire lifespan of the LED module. Optional programming 3 OTL: Pre-set driver to signal end of life of the LED module(s) for better fixture management. Dimming options DA: 4 Hrs 25% Reduction DB: 4 Hrs 50% Reduction DC: 4 Hrs 75% Reduction DD: 6 Hrs 25% Reduction DE: 6 Hrs 50% Reduction DF: 6 Hrs 75% Reduction DG: 8 Hrs 25% Reduction DH: 8 Hrs 50% Reduction DJ: 8 Hrs 75% Reduction DALI: Pre-set driver compatible with the DALI logarithmic control system. Surge protection Surge protector tested in accordance with ANSI/IEEE C62.45 per ANSI/IEEE C62.41.2 Scenario I Category C High Exposure 10kV/10kA waveforms for Line Ground, Line Neutral and Neutral Ground, and in accordance with U.S. DOE (Department of Energy) MSSLC (Municipal Solid State Street Lighting Consortium) model specification for LED roadway luminaires electrical immunity requirements for High Test Level 10kV / 10kA. Luminaire options F:Fluted spinning 7.16" 10.36" CXF5&6A CXF5&6WCXF5&6T CXF4A CF4W CXF5 CXF15 CXF14 CXF4T 20.88"14.96"23.27"22.27"25.11" 20.88" 24.50" 26"14.96"25.86" 20.88"15.99"9.00"20.88"15.10"25.04" 20.88" 25.79" 20.88"15.99"9.00"22.11"20.65" N:None CXF14-15-Westbrook 10/16 page 5 of 5 CXF14 / CXF15 Westbrook LED pendants Urban luminaire © 2016 Philips Lighting Holding B.V. All rights reserved. Philips reserves the right to make changes in specifications and/or to discontinue any product at any time without notice or obligation and will not be liable for any consequences resulting from the use of this publication. philips.com/luminaires Philips Lighting North America Corporation 200 Franklin Square Drive, Somerset, NJ 08873 Tel. 855-486-2216 Philips Lighting Canada Ltd. 281 Hillmount Rd, Markham, ON, Canada L6C 2S3 Tel. 800-668-9008 Specification (continued) Wiring Gauge 18 wires. Top mount option come with quick disconnects. Arm mount options provide a 6" Minimum exceeding from luminaire. Hardware All non-ferrous fasteners prevent corrosion and ensure longer life. Luminaire useful life Refer to IES files for energy consumption and delivered lumens for each option. Based on ISTMT in situ thermal testing in accordance with UL1598 and UL8750, using LM-80 data from LED manufacturers and engineering prediction methods, the luminaire useful life is expected to reach 100,000+ hours with >L70 lumen maintenance @ 25°C. (48 LED and 64 LED@700mA is 82,000) Luminaire useful life accounts for LED lumen maintenance and additional factors, including LED life, driver life, PCB substrate, solder joints on/off cycles and burning hours for nominal applications. LED products manufacturing standard The electronic components sensitive to electrostatic discharge (ESD) such as light emitting diodes (LEDs) are assembled in compliance with IEC61340 5 1 and ANSI/ ESD S20.20 standards so as to eliminate ESD events that could decrease the useful life of the product Quality control The manufacturer must provide a written confirmation of its ISO 9001 2008 and ISO 14001 2004 International Quality Standards Certification. Vibration resistance Meets the ANSI C136.31 2001, American National Standard for Roadway Luminaire Vibration specifications for normal Applications. Certifications and Compliance cETL listed to Canadian safety standards for wet locations. Manufactured to ISO 9001:2008 Standards. UL8750 and UL1598 compliant. ETL listed to U.S. safety standards for wet locations. cETL listed to Canadian safety standards for wet locations. LM80 & LM79 tested. IP Rating: The LED optics chamber is IP66 rated. The LED driver is IP66 rated. Westbrook LED luminaires are DesignLights Consortium qualified. Warranty 5 year extended warranty. Ordering Guide Example: HFH2310 P3 A Product Code HFH2310 Single Post diameter P3 3" Post Mount P4 4" Post Mount Finish A Black B White G Verde H Bronze I Gray J Green Specifications HOUSING: 356 HM high-strength, low-copper, proprietary cast aluminum alloy . FINISH: Thermoset polyester powdercoat is electrostatically applied after a five-stage conversion cleaning process and bonded by heat fusion thermosetting. Laboratory tested for superior weatherability and fade resistance in accordance with ASTM B117 specifications. For larger projects where a custom color is required, contact the factory for more information. MOUNTING: Cast Aluminum Hub mounts to a 3" OD x 3" long (P3) [if applicable] or 4" OD x 6 1/2" long (P4) [if applicable] tenon and is secured with at least (3) 5/16"-18 stainless steel set screws. CERTIFICATIONS: Manufactured to ISO 9001:2008 Standards. WARRANTY: Three-year limited warranty. Height : 17 1/4" (44 cm) Length: 21 1/4" (54 cm) EPA: 1.10 sq. ft. Single (HFH2310)Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 1 of 1 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2 Ordering Guide Example: P4131 12 A T D Product Code P4131 Pole Height 12 12' 14 14' 16 16' 18 18' Finish A Black B White G Verde H Bronze J Green Outlet Location (Optional) T 12" Down from Top - Aligned with House Side B 4" Up from Top of Base - Aligned with House Side Outlet Options (Optional) D Standard Duplex G GFI Duplex Specifications HOUSING: 356 HM high-strength, low-copper, proprietary cast aluminum alloy . 6005-T5 extruded aluminum. Anchor rods are hot dipped galvanized steel . FINISH: A durable polyurethane enamel finish is applied after assemblies are shot blasted to create a surface profile which allows for the highest level of paint adhesion. Laboratory tested for superior weatherability and fade resistance in accordance with ASTM B-117-64 and ANSI/ASTM G53-77 specifications. For larger projects where a custom color is required, contact the factory for more information. WARRANTY: Three-year limited warranty. OUTLET: Standard Duplex Outlet has universal metal weatherproof cover. Weatherproof while in use. Heavy-duty all-metal construction. Lockable security cover. Meets NEC 406.9 (B). Weather resistant. GFI Duplex Outlet has dual-function indicator light, universal metal weatherproof cover. Weatherproof while in use. Heavy-duty all-metal construction. Lockable security cover. Meets NEC 406.9 (B). Weather resistant. Tenon/Top: 4" OD Bolt Circle: 8" - 14" Anchor Rods: (4) 3/4" dia. x 19" Base Dimensions: 19" dia. x 54 1/2" Hand Hole : 6" x 11 1/2" Shaft: 4" Straight P4131 Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 1 of 2 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2 Wall Thickness: 0.125 Aluminum Height : 12', 14', 16', 18' Pole EPA Values Height Windspeed(mph)12' 14' 16' 18' 80 16.7400 10.9000 9.0700 7.5300 100 10.2600 6.4300 5.1300 4.0300 P4131 Specification Sheet Project Name:Location:MFG: Philips Hadco Fixture Type:Catalog No.:Qty: ISO 9001:2008 Registered Page 2 of 2 Note: Philips reserves the right to modify the above details to reflect changes in the cost of materials and/or production and/or design without prior notice. 100 Craftway Drive, Littlestown, PA 17340 | P: +1-717-359-7131 F: +1-717-359-9289 | http://www.hadco.com | Copyright 2013 Philips HW2