Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout17188 Staff Report DRB Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 1 of 13 Application No. 17188 Type Site Plan, Certificate of Appropriateness, Demolition, Departures Project Name BG Mill Summary A Site Plan application to allow the demolition of the existing mill building and the construction of a five story mixed use building with departures. Zoning B-3 Growth Policy Central Business District Parcel Size .512 acres Overlay District(s) Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Street Address 714 E. Mendenhall Street, Bozeman, MT Legal Description Lot 1 Northern Pacific Addition, S07, T02S, R06E, P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Owner BG Mill, LLC 102 N. Broadway Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715 Applicant Pearson Design Group 102 N. Broadway Ave. Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative Pearson Design Group 102 N. Broadway Ave. Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Planner Brian Krueger Engineer Griffin Nielsen Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Mailed Newspaper Legal Ad 9/7/18-10/1/18 9/7/18 9/7/18 N/A Recommendation Approval Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 2 of 13 PROJECT SUMMARY The subject property is within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) and located within the northeast neighborhood. The subject property is not within a historic district. Administrative Design Review (ADR) has reviewed the design and found the plans do comply with the standards and intent of NCOD Design Guidelines. The following report reviews how the proposal complies Plan Review Criteria, the Growth Policy, Zoning Standards, Engineering Standards, the NCOD Design Guidelines and the Certificate of appropriateness criteria (C)OA). The DRB is required to review all of the Plan Review Criteria. The project complies with all design criteria within the NCOD Design Guidelines. Pursuant to section 38.340.020, the Design Review Board (DRB) authority; development applications located within the overlay district for a project of this size and intensity. The DRB is required to make a recommendation to the Director on this application. The Design Review Board meeting will occur at 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman MT, in the City Commission room at 5:30 p.m. on September 26, 2018. The Director of Community Development will make the final decision on this application after the public comment period is closed. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. Conditions approval provided below are within the purview of the DRB. Additional conditions of approval and code corrections are required and will be included with the final report provided to the Director of Community Development Recommended 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. Those which may be identified by the DRB as recommended conditions. CODE PROVISIONS Development Review Committee comments are not complete as of the date of this report. 1. If not already filed for the subject site, 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. Street improvements to East Mendenhall Street including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage b. Street improvements to North Broadway Avenue including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage c. Street improvements to East Main Street including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage d. Intersection improvements to East Mendenhall Street and North Broadway Avenue e. Intersection improvements to East Main Street and North Broadway Avenue f. Intersection improvements to East Main Street and Highland Boulevard The document filed must 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 applicant must provide a copy of the filed SID waiver prior to site plan approval. 2. The transfer of water rights or the payment of cash-in-lieu of water rights must be provided in accordance to Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) section 38.410.130. 3. Cash in lieu of parkland must be provided in accordance to Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) section 38.420.030. Figure 1: Current Zoning Map Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 3 of 13 Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 4 of 13 Figure 2: Proposed site plan Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 5 of 13 Figure 3 & 4: Conceptual Renderings ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations 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 38.230.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the Director of Community Development shall consider the following: 1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy 38.100.040 B Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Central Business District Yes Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 6 of 13 Zoning B-3, Downtown Business District Yes Comments: The uses are allowed within the zoning district. The property is within the City’s municipal service area. The project is an infill redevelopment providing a mix of uses at urban densities. Staff finds that the project does contribute to the goals of the growth policy. 2. Conformance to this chapter, including the cessation of any current violations 38.200.160 Meets Code? Current Violations None Yes Comments: There are no current violations on the subject property 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations 38.100.080 Meets Code? Conflicts None Yes Condominium ownership NA NA Comments: The proposed uses of the site are consistent with the allowed uses of the B-3 district. No specific conflicts identified. Additional steps will be required including but not limited to final payment for cash in lieu of water rights, recordation of the SID waiver and final plan documents and approval of building permits. The Building Division of the Department of Community Development will review the requirements of the International Building Code for compliance at the time of building permit application. 4. Conformance with Plan Review for applicable permit types as specified in article 2 Section 38.230 Meets Code? Site Plan & Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) Yes Comments: The site plan and COA criteria are met this this project. The proposal is not compatible or sensitive to the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods. Architectural design, building mass, neighborhood identity are not compatible to the immediate environment and neighborhood. Further analysis on this is in Section 13, NCOD Design Guidelines. 5. Conformance with zoning provisions of article 3 38.320.100 Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Mixed Use, Retail/Commercial/Office/Apartments Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Yes Zoning B-3 Setbacks (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes Front Storefront NA Rear 0 0 Side 0 0 Alley 5 5 Comments: The proposed setbacks meet all B-3 zone district standards. Relationship to adjacent properties standards 38.520.030 (light and air access and privacy) and angled setback plane 38.360.030 NA Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-340 Yes Building Height Requirements 38.320.010-.060 Yes Lot coverage 47% Allowed 100% Height 73’ Allowed 70-74’ Yes Comments: There are multiple different rooflines proposed. All meet the height standards for the B-3 district. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: All encroachments are in conformance to standards. Yes Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 NA Supplemental uses/type NA NA Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 7 of 13 Comments: NA Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 NA NA Affordable housing plan NA Comments: NA 6a(1). Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4: Transportation facilities and access 38.400 Meets Code? Street vision Yes Yes Secondary access Yes Traffic Impact Study / LOS Yes Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Yes Comments: No offsite improvements to the transportation system are identified in the traffic study. Vehicular access to the property is from the alley and East Mendenhall Street. The City Engineer granted a deviation to access distance from the East Mendenhall/North Broadway intersection.. Street dedication NA Yes Drive access locations and widths Yes Number of drive accesses 1-alley, 1 street Yes Street easements NA Special Improvement Districts Yes No Comments: Access is from an alley off East Mendenhall Street and directly to East Mendenhall Street. Due to the irregular shape of the lot, two access locations are allowed. The alley will paved with pervious pavers and brought up to a higher standard. Vehicular access complies with code requirements. Parking requirements of 38.540 Required parking nonresidential minus1st 3000 sq. ft B-3 43 Yes Required parking residential 10 Reductions nonresidential - and bike and shower facilities-6 space reduction 10% Reductions residential 1:1 mixed use- 0 residential parking required Yes Provided parking off street 38 On street parking 5 6a(2). Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4: Pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress 38.400 Meets Code? Design of the pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems to assure that pedestrians and vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site and between properties and activities within the neighborhood area Yes Vehicle accesses to site 2 Yes Pedestrian access location(s) Yes Site vision triangles Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems, design features to enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including, but not limited to paving patterns, grade differences, landscaping and lighting Crosswalks NA Curb ramps Yes Pedestrian lighting Yes Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 8 of 13 Comments: The sidewalk along East Mendenhall Street provides pedestrian access. The sidewalk will be constructed to conform to standards. Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular transportation systems to the systems in adjacent development and the general community Yes Access easements NA NA Dedication of right-of-way or easements necessary for pedestrian, shared use pathway and similar transportation facilities NA Comments: Not required for this application. 6a(3) Loading and Unloading areas Meets Code? Loading and unloading area requirements 38.540.080 NA Loading and unloading NA NA First Berth (min. 70 feet length, 12 feet in width and 14 feet in height) NA NA Additional Berths (min. 45 feet length) NA NA Comments: NA. No off-street loading berths are required for this use. 6b Community design and element provisions 38.410 Meets Code? Lot and block standards 38.410.040 Yes Rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation NA Comments: NA Provisions for utilities including efficient public services and utilities 38.410.050-060 Yes Municipal infrastructure requirements Yes Easements (City and public utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes Water, sewer, and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water No Comments: CIL is calculated, but must be paid prior to site plan approval. Site Surface Drainage and stormwater control 38.410.080 Yes Location, design and capacity Yes Landscaping per 38.410.080.H Yes Comments: NA Grading 38.410.080 NA Maximum 1:4 slope requirements met NA Comments: Stormwater provided in underground detention system. Pervious paver systems incorporated at the alley and E. Mendenhall Street frontage 6c. Park and recreation requirements 38.420 Meets Code? Enhancement of natural environment NA Wildlife habitat or feeding area preservation NA Maintenance of public park or public open space access NA Park/Recreational area design NA Parkland Cash-in-lieu for maximum known density not to exceed 12 units/acre (ac.). Yes .52 ac. X 10 units/ac. X 0.03 ac.= .3 ac. Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 9 of 13 Cash donation in-lieu(CIL) Proposed use of CIL approved, amount not paid No Improvements in-lieu NA NA Comments: Parkland dedication is required. Project proposes Cash in lieu in the B-3 district and meets standards. CIL must be paid prior to site plan approval. 7a-c. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Compatibility, Design and Arrangement Meets Code? Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development relative to architectural design, building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of buildings on the site and visual integration Yes Block Frontage Standards 38.510 Yes with departure Building Design 38.530 Yes Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: Block frontage standard for this project is Storefront along E. Mendenhall Street a departure is proposed to the sidewalk width due to topographical challenges. Sidewalk departure meets criteria. Departure requested for retail/commercial space depth on E. Mendenhall Street. Departure meets criteria. Both departures are recommended for approval due to the following findings: The site is irregularly shaped and includes a slope from south to north. In order to accommodate structured parking on the ground floor and an urban storefront streetscape design on the East Mendenhall the project the departures are justified and the design solutions proposed to mitigate for the departures meet the criteria for each departure and the intent of the block frontage provisions. Design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes Relationship to adjacent properties 38.520.030 Yes Non-motorized circulation and design 38.520.040 Yes Vehicular circulation and parking 38.520.050 Yes Comments: Project conforms to requirements. Design and arrangement of elements of the plan (e.g., buildings circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) in harmony with the existing natural topography, natural water bodies and water courses, existing vegetation, and to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration Yes Site Planning and Design Elements 38.520 Yes Comments: Project conforms to requirements Landscaping N/A 7d. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Landscaping including the enhancement of buildings, appearance of vehicular use, open space and pedestrian area and the preservation of replacement of natural vegetation Meets Code? Submittal requirements for landscape plans 38.220.100 Yes Mandatory landscaping 38.550.050 Yes Yard Yes Additional screening NA Parking lot screening NA Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 10 of 13 Interior parking lot landscape NA Off-street loading spaces screening NA Street frontage Yes Street median island NA Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Trees for residential adjacency NA Performance points 13 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 NA Additional NA NA Fencing and walls NA NA Comments: Street frontage landscaping complies with requirements and with departure for block frontage Site planning and design required 38.520 Yes Pedestrian area landscaping, including pathways and internal circulation 38.520.040 Yes Internal roadway landscaping 38.520.050 NA Open space landscaping 38.520.060 Yes Service area and mechanical equipment landscaping and screening 38.520.070 Yes Open space Yes Comments: Project meets requirements. 7e. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Open Space Meets Code? Open Space Section 38.520.060 Total required 10% Total provided >10% Yes Comments: The proposed design meets open space standards. A shared rooftop deck is proposed. 7f. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Lighting 38.570 Meets Code? Building-mounted lighting (cutoff and temperature) Yes Site lighting (supports, cutoff and temperature) NA Minimum light trespass at property line Yes Comments: The proposed building mounted lighting meets standards. No site lighting is proposed. 7g. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Signage 38.560 Meets Code? Allowed (sq. ft)/building NA NA Proposed (sq. ft) NA Comments: The only signage proposed at this time is building name/designation signage. 8a-c. Conformance with environmental and open space objectives in articles 4- 6 Meets Code? Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 11 of 13 Enhancement of natural environment: Integrated stormwater, LID, removal of inappropriate fill Yes Grading Yes On-site retention/detention Yes Comments: Project meets requirements. Drainage design No Stormwater maintenance plan 38.410.030.A No Stormwater feature: landscaping amenity, native species, curvilinear, 75% live vegetation NA Comments: No surface stormwater facilities are proposed. Watercourse and wetland protections and associated wildlife habitats NA If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area NA Comments: NA 9. Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of articles 4-6 Meets Code? Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan NA Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: NA 10. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties 38.220 Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Yes Comments: Public notice is not required for DRB. Project is under public notice. 11. 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 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. 38.410.060 Meets Code? Subdivision exemption NA NA Required Easements NA NA Reciprocal access and shared parking easement NA NA NA Mutual access easement and agreement NA Comments: Not applicable the project is proposed on one lot. 12. Phasing of development 38.230.020.B including buildings and infrastructure Meets Code? Phasing No # of phases 1 Yes Comments: One phase is proposed. 13. Standards for certificate of appropriateness 38.340.050 Meets Code? Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 12 of 13 Certificate of appropriateness standards Yes Secretary of the Interiors Standards for new construction Yes Architectural appearance Yes Proportion of doors and windows Yes Relationship of building masses and spaces Yes Roof shape Yes Scale Yes Directional expression, with regard to the dominant horizontal or vertical expression of surrounding structures Yes Architectural details Yes Concealment of non-period appurtenances, such as mechanical equipment Yes Materials and color schemes Yes Comments: The proposed project is located within the NCOD. This means that the project must adhere to a higher level of design, focus on the relationship of the surrounding area, and maintain a level of integrity and character that makes up the NCOD. An Architectural Design Review (ADR) team made up of staff reviewed the proposed design and found that the project meets all applicable COA criteria including NCOD design guidelines. 14. Conformance with the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Design (NCOD) Guidelines Meets Code? Overlay District Provisions Yes Comments: The proposed project is located within the NCOD. This means that the project must adhere to a higher level of design, focus on the relationship of the surrounding area, and maintain a level of integrity and character that makes up the NCOD. An Architectural Design Review (ADR) committee made up of staff reviewed the proposed design and finds that the project meets all applicable NCOD design guidelines. Introduction Yes Chapter 2: Guidelines for all properties Yes Chapter 4b: Guidelines for commercial areas outside of Main Street Historic District Yes Appendices Yes Comments: The proposed project is reviewed under the classification of new infill and construction in the NCOD, but outside of a historic district. The above sections and chapters of the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Presentation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District apply to this project. 15. NCOD Demolition 38.340.080 Review of Demolition of historic structures or sites Meets Code? Historic Structure per 38.700.090 Yes Yes Comments: The proposed project is an eligible historic structure that meets the definitions provided in article 7 of the UDC. Approval of the proposed subsequent development is required for all historic structures proposed for demolition and for the proposed movement of any structure of site. Yes Public Notice Yes Criteria Yes 1. The property’s historic significance. 2. Whether the structure has no viable economic life remaining 3. Whether the subsequent development complies with Section 38.340.050 (standards for certificates of appropriateness) Staff Report BG Mill Site Plan Review Application 17188 Friday, September 21, 2018 Page 13 of 13 4. Whether the subsequent development includes construction of new building(s) unless the existing character of the area does not include buildings. 5. Subsequent development requires a building permit and does not include proposals which leave the site without building(s) or structure(s)/ Notwithstanding the above, for projects proposing the removal of a historic structure, which do not qualify for sketch plan review pursuant to 38.230.070, the review authority may determine the proposed subsequent site development is more appropriate for the site based upon the criteria in 38.230.100 (plan review criteria). Comments: No demolition of the mill is permitted until the building permit for the subsequent development is approved. Public notice was provided on September 7, 2018. An updated Montana Historic Property Record form is included in the application. The proposed structure for demolition is primarily an elevator machine and grain storage bins that are not a habitable structure. The subsequent development conforms to the criteria for a COA and plan review criteria. The subsequent development will leave the site with a new infill building and will not result in a vacant site. The Director of Community Development must find that the criteria have been met for demolition. This decision will coincide with the overall project approval.