Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-25-19 City Commission Packet Materials - A4. Bridger Vale Preliminary PlatPage 1 of 30 17231, City Commission Staff Report for the Bridger Vale Subdivision Public Hearing Date: City Commission, March 25, 2019 at 6:00 pm in the City Commission Room 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana Project Description: A Preliminary Plat application to allow the subdivision of 6.48 acres into twenty townhome lots, one commercial lot, one city park lot, one open space lot with an associated street and alley. The application is associated with a concurrent Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to allow the mixed residential and commercial development with relaxations to regulations requested for required park frontage, REMU setbacks, public lands irrigation, street design and a request for concurrent construction. Project Location: 806 Manley Road. The parcels are legally described Remaining Tract GLR-1 of COS 221, located in the Southwest ¼ of S 31, T01 S, R06 E, P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. Recommendation: Approval with conditions and code requirements Parks Plan Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the parks master plan, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 17321 and move to approve the parks master plan for the Bridger Vale Subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Project Overall Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 17321 and move to approve the Bridger Vale subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions. Report Date: March 13, 2019 Staff Contact: Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager Anna Russell, Project Engineer Agenda Item Type: Action (Quasi-judicial) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Unresolved Issues If the PUD and associated relaxations are not approved, then the conditions and findings of this report will need to be modified. The analysis summarized in this report assumed approval of the requested relaxations. Staff has recommended approval of the PUD and associated relaxations. 374 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 2 of 30 Project Summary The property owner and applicant made application to develop the vacant property directly north and adjacent to the East Gallatin Recreation Area (EGRA), accessed from Manley Road. The development proposes a townhouse development with a future commercial building lot. The proposal includes four townhouse clusters including four dwelling units each and two, two unit townhouses. The application includes a major subdivision of one parcel into twenty single household townhouse lots, one commercial lot, one common open space lot, one City Park lot with an associated street and alley The subject property is recently annexed to the City and is zoned Residential Emphasis Mixed Use District and Public Lands and Institutions. Environmental concerns related to the project’s proximity to the City’s almost closed East Gallatin Landfill have been addressed through the imposition of institutional controls. This subdivision proposes to meet its affordable housing requirement through cash in lieu instead of construction of housing. This is an allowed alternative. The subdivision provides a mix of uses in compliance with REMU zoning. The additional park area and publicly accessible open space provides the required neighborhood center. The Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the application. Based on its evaluation of the application against the criteria, the DRC found the application adequate for continued review on February 6, 2019. The Planning Board reviewed the application on March 5, 2019. The Planning Board is the advisory body to the City Commission on this subdivision application. The Planning Board recommended approval of the project with the conditions and code provisions outlined in this staff report. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Subdivision Committee reviewed the application on March 8, 2019 and recommended approval of the applicant’s parks plan with a condition to add a dog waste station. The Community Affordable Housing Board reviewed the application on March 13, 2019 and recommended approval of the applicant’s proposal to utilize cash in lieu (CIL) of affordable housing in order to meet code requirements. The Board recommended that the CIL fee be paid at the time of building permit issuance and that if the building permits are phased the CIL fee will be adjusted over time if there is a rate change. No public comment has been received. The final decision for a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with less than 50 lots must be made within 60 working days of the date it was deemed adequate. The Development Review Committee (DRC) deemed the application adequate for continued review on February 6, 2019. Pursuant to BMC 38.240.130 the city commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the subdivision application by April 18, 2019, unless there is a written extension from the developer, not to exceed one year. 375 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 3 of 30 Conditions were revised for clarity and consistency with prior decisions between Planning Board and City Commission. Revised conditions are shown with an asterisk (*). Alternatives 1. Approve the application with the recommended conditions; 2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions; 3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. This alternative is requested if the Commission wishes to amend or add conditions of approval. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .......................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES ............................................................................... 11 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL .......................................... 11 SECTION 4 - CODE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRING PLAT CORRECTIONS ...................... 14 SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS .......................................... 16 SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ................................................................. 17 Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.130.A.5.b, BMC. .................... 17 Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608 ................................................. 19 Preliminary Plat Supplements ........................................................................................... 24 APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY...................................... 27 APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ......................................................... 28 APPENDIX C – PROJECT BACKGROUND ............................................................................. 28 APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION ................................................................................ 29 FISCAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................... 30 376 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 4 of 30 ATTACHMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 30 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Zoning classifications 377 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 5 of 30 Growth policy designation 378 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 6 of 30 Current land use 379 Page 7 of 30 City Commission Approved Parks Master Plan for EGRA October 2017 380 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 8 of 30 381 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 9 of 30 382 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 10 of 30 383 Page 11 of 30 SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES There are no variances requested with this subdivision application. The concurrent Planned Unit Development (PUD) requests the following relaxations through the PUD 1. BMC 38.320.040 Table of Form and Intensity Standards REMU to allow Townhouse clusters to exceed the maximum front setback of 15 feet. 2. BMC 38.420.060.A to not provide the minimum park street frontage. The application proposes no street frontage for the city park lot. 3. BMC 38.420.060.A.2.b or c the application proposes to not meet the requirements to mitigate for reduced park street frontage. 4. BMC 38.400.050.A.1 the proposed primary access street, Bridger Vale Drive is requested to be constructed as a non-standard street section. 5. BMC 38.550.070 Landscaping of public lands. The application requests to not irrigate parkland, open space or other public lands landscaping with a well. The property’s groundwater is impacted by VOC’s and the environmental consultants recommend against using ground water for irrigation. The relaxations may be granted with a PUD. No action will be taken on these requested relaxations as part of the subdivision review. This review assumes that the requested relaxations have been approved. If that is not correct, then additional analysis will be required. Condition 8 requires a notice to purchasers to inform them of the unusual development standards in this development. This will avoid confusion, purchase under misapprehensions, and future conflicts between owners and the City. As the plat requires approval of the PUD in order to conform to all regulations, condition 3 establishes the sequence of approvals needed to enable approval of a final plat. SECTION 3 - 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 preliminary plat application. Additional conditions may apply to the planned unit development being processed concurrently. 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. The final plat must conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the Uniform Standards for Monumentation, Certificates of Survey, and Final Subdivision Plats (24.183.1101 ARM, 24.183.1104 ARM, 24.183.1107 ARM) and must be accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that record drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates. 3. The final planned unit development plan must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to the approval of the final plat. 4. The final plat must contain the following notation on the conditions of approval sheet in the final plat: “Ownership of all open space lots, areas and trails, and responsibility of 384 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 12 of 30 maintenance thereof and for city assessments levied on the open space lands shall be that of the property owners’ association. Maintenance responsibility must include, in addition to the open space and trails, all vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees and irrigation systems in the public right-of-way boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets and as adjacent to public parks, greenway corridors or other common open space areas. All areas within the subdivision that are designated herein as open space including sidewalks and trails are for the use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the general public. The property owners’ association must be responsible for levying annual assessments to provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all open space lots, areas and trails. 5. Concurrent with the recording the final plat for the subdivision the subdivider must transfer ownership of all common open space areas within each phase to the property owners’ association created by the subdivider to maintain all open space areas within the Bridger Vale Subdivision. 6. Documentation of compliance with the parkland dedication requirements of Section 38.420, BMC must be provided with the final plat. A table showing the parkland requirements for the subdivision and the method of meeting the parkland dedication must be included on the final plat conditions of approval sheet. The table shall explicitly state how much parkland credit was allocated for each lot within this phase. This table shall include but not be limited to listing all dedicated parkland requirements, parkland or parkland credits and areas not credited towards parkland (i.e., detention/retention areas, watercourse setbacks, wetlands, common open space, parking facilities) and the total area of each. 7. The final plat must provide all necessary utility easements and they must be described, dimensioned and shown on each subdivision block of the final plat in their true and correct location. 8. * A notice prepared by the City shall be filed concurrently with the final plat so that it will appear on title reports. It shall read substantially as follows: Lots within the Bridger Vale Subdivision are subject to specific design standards, unique building setbacks from property lines, and restrictions on use. These standards may be found in [insert correct reference to design standard location]. Lot owners are advised that these are a result of the planned unit development relaxation and are specific to the Bridger Vale Subdivision and the customized standards are in place of the general development standards of the City of Bozeman Zoning. If a revised development standard is not specifically established in the Bridger Vale approval documents the general standards of the City apply. The City’s general standards may be revised over time. Modification of the special standards would require an amendment to the Bridger Vale Planned Unit Development. Modifications are strongly discouraged. It is the obligation of the lot owner to be fully informed as to these standards before beginning any home or site design process. Approval by the design review entity established in the covenants of the development does not bind the City of Bozeman to approve a construction plan. 9. The property owners’ association documents must include a listing of the Environmental Site Assessments conducted for this property, a summary of the findings of each report and a contact/location wherein the documents may be viewed. 10. * The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions must contain provisions referencing the identified and potential environmental hazards on the property and the 385 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 13 of 30 required mitigation for the townhomes and the commercial building(s) and all other requirements of the recorded Institutional Controls. Said covenants must run with the land, bind all holders, owners, lessees, occupiers, and purchasers of the property, and must be included in all deeds, leases, and other instruments of conveyance of the property. No modifications to the covenants are allowed without prior written consent of the City. 11. * The final plat must contain a note on the conditions of approval sheet of the plat advising current and future property owners of the identified and potential environmental hazards on the property as provided for in the Institutional Controls. Said plat note must reference the Environmental Site Assessments by project number and the associated declaration of covenants conditions, and restrictions including all Institutional Controls. 12. * Per the annexation agreement for this parcel, the final plat must contain a note on the conditions of approval sheet of the plat that states “Any future structures must be built slab- on-grade and have a sub-slab vapor mitigation system or equivalent designed and certified by a professional engineer and certified to installation per design by a professional engineer to mitigate any environmental concerns from groundwater, soil, or soil vapor contamination.” 13. * The city accepts maintenance responsibility for Bridger Vale Drive, except for the landscaping and stormwater facilities in the median which shall be the responsibility of the property owners’ association. 14. An encroachment permit must be obtained for the landscaping and stormwater facilities in Bridger Vale Drive. 15. All stormwater facilities not on property dedicated to the City of Bozeman require public utility easements for storm water facility maintenance. 16. * The declaration of covenants, conditions, and restrictions related to all required Institutional Controls must list the City and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality as intended beneficiaries, entitled to enforce the covenants related to the identified and potential environmental hazards and remediation on the property. 17. Due to the depth to groundwater at this location, no crawl spaces or basements will be allowed. The applicant must include a note on the plat that no crawl spaces or basements are allowed in this subdivision. 18. The alley must have curbing on both sides. A drop curb on the south side will be allowed while a standard 6” by 6” curb is required on the north side. 19. The applicant must include a note on the conditions of approval sheet of the plat that states that maintenance of all stormwater facilities is the responsibility of the property owners’ association. 20. The applicant must coordinate with the City and the owners of the Park to the south to design and improve the transition from a paved road to existing road surface prior to final plat approval. 21. A construction management plan must be submitted with the infrastructure plans and the final plat application that maintains access to park at all times during construction. 386 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 14 of 30 22. A fire hydrant flow test performed within the last 12 months must be used for Water and Sewer Design Report. This updated data can be submitted with the infrastructure plan review. 23. The extension of the sewer system must be designed and constructed as to allow for the future construction of Manley Road. Manholes may not be placed within vehicle wheel paths. 24. A dog waste station acceptable to the city parks department must be added to the parks master plan for the city park lot. 25. The CIL of affordable housing fee must be paid at the time of building permit issuance. 26. If the building permits are issued over time the CIL amount due will be adjusted based on the currently adopted rates at the time of permit issuance. 27. * A notice must be filed concurrently with the final plat requiring that all development on the property must comply with the recorded Declaration of Institutional Controls for the Bridger Vale Annexation (Document #2634483 in the records of the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder). 28. * No wells for potable or irrigation use are permitted within the boundaries of the Bridger Vale subdivision. 29. * The applicant must execute at the Gallatin County Clerk & Recorder's Office in conjunction with the final plat, a waiver of right-to-protest creation of a City-wide special district for parks and trails, which would provide a mechanism for the fair and equitable assessment of costs for City parks and trails. SECTION 4 - CODE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRING PLAT CORRECTIONS The following are procedural requirements not yet demonstrated by the plat and must be satisfied at the final plat. 1. BMC 38.220.300 and 310. The Property Owners’ Association (POA) documents must be finalized and recorded with the final plat. The POA documents must include the requirements of Section 38.220.300 and 320. A common area and facility maintenance plan is not included. A common area and facility maintenance guarantee is not included. A guarantee for open space preservation is not provided. A final weed control plan must be provided. 2. BMC 38.240.450 requires a certificate of completion of improvements. Certificate must specifically list all installed improvements and financially guaranteed improvements. 3. BMC 38.240.520 requires a certificate of completion of non-public improvements. Certificate must specifically list all installed improvements and financially guaranteed improvements. These will include landscaping in stormwater open space lot. 4. BMC 38.550.070. In accordance with the requirements of this section, installation by the developer of vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees, and irrigation system in the public right-of-way boulevard strips and in and adjacent to public parks or other open space areas is required prior to final plat approval. 5. BMC 38.410.120 Mail Delivery. A cluster mail box location approved by the United States Post Office must be identified with the final plat application and infrastructure plans. 387 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 15 of 30 6. BMC 38.240.150.A.3.d Transfer of ownership of public land, off-site land, private land, personal property, improvements and water rights; documents required. a. (1) For the transfer of real property in satisfaction of required or offered dedications to the city, and required or offered donations or grants to the property owners' association (POA), the subdivider or owner of the property must submit with the application for final plat a warranty deed or other instrument acceptable to the city attorney transferring fee simple ownership to the city or the POA. b. (2) For the transfer of personal property installed upon dedicated parkland or city- owned open space, or POA-owned parkland or open space, the subdivider must provide the city an instrument acceptable to the city attorney transferring all its rights, title and interest in such improvements including all applicable warranties to such improvements to the city or the POA. c. (3) The subdivider or owner of the property must record the deed or instrument transferring ownership or interests at the time of recording of the final plat with the original of such deed or instrument returned to the city or POA as applicable. d. (4) For the transfer of ownership interest in water, the subdivider or owner of the property must submit with the application for final plat a deed or other instrument acceptable to the city attorney transferring ownership to the city or POA, along with all required state department of natural resources and conservation documentation, certification and authorization. 7. BMC 38.240.530 When irrigation of public facilities are to be installed prior to final plat approval, the final plat of the subdivision must contain a certificate of completion of water- related improvements. The certificate must list all completed and accepted improvements, including but not limited to all irrigation system record drawings. The subdivision proposes irrigation of public facilities including parkland and public access open space. This certificate must be provided on the final plat. Irrigation by a well is prohibited by Condition of Approval 28. Therefore, and alternate means of irrigation must be provided. 8. 38.400.060.B.4 BMC requires all arterial and collector streets and intersections with arterial and collector streets to operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless specifically exempted by this section which allows an exception to the LOS standard if: a. Granting a waiver would not be contrary to the public health and safety and is in the public interest; i. As the intersection level of service operates at a LOS “D” in the AM peak- hour condition primarily due to left turn traffic from Manley onto Griffin and traffic generated by this project will impact the intersection LOS primarily in the PM peak hour condition as traffic leaves the project, the public health and safety are protected. b. Improvements to the intersection LOS are within the next three years of the City’s capital improvement plan (CIP); i. The CIP lists this intersection for construction of improvements within three years. c. All right-of-way necessary for the intersection improvements are obtained; 388 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 16 of 30 i. The City has verified that all right of way is in public control. d. The Commission has approved a financing plan; i. The financing is provided through the City’s Impact Fee Program and the applicant must verify if a local share is required for this intersection other than what is planned in the City’s Arterial and Collector District Fund. ii. 9. BMC 38.410.130 Prior to a final approval of all development reviewed as a site plan, conditional use permit, planned unit development, or subdivision and prior to an annexation of any land, one of the following must occur: Payment must be made to the city of a payment-in-lieu of water rights, calculated based on the annual demand for volume of water the development will require multiplied by the most current annual unit price. The applicant must pay CIL of water rights due prior to final plat approval. 10. BMC 38.41.070.A.1 At least 10-feet of separation must be maintained between trees or other significant landscaping features and water and sewer services. 11. BMC 38.220.300 and 310 and BMC 38.410.080.D The Bridger Vale Property Owners’ Association (POA) documents must incorporate the stormwater maintenance plan and clearly state the property owners’ association responsibility for stormwater maintenance for all stormwater facilities. 12. BMC 38.410.080. The applicant is proposing stormwater facilities in locations known to have a high groundwater table. The Stormwater Division recommends that the Engineer confirm that groundwater will not impact the function or maintenance of the facilities by completing a geotechnical analysis and seasonal high groundwater study. 13. BMC 38.270. 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 shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans shall also be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant shall 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. Building permits will not be issued prior to City acceptance of the infrastructure improvements unless all provisions set forth in Section 38.270.030.D of the Bozeman Municipal Code are met to allow for concurrent construction. The applicant must complete construction of off-site sanitary sewer upgrades prior to obtaining a building permit. SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS The DRC determined that the application is adequate for continued review and recommended approval with conditions on February 6, 2019. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Subdivision Committee reviewed the application on March 8, 2019 and recommended approval of the applicant’s parks plan with a condition to add a dog waste station. 389 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 17 of 30 The Community Affordable Housing Board reviewed the application on March 13, 2019 and recommended approval of the applicant’s proposal to utilize cash in lieu of affordable housing in order to meet code requirements. The Planning Board conducted a public hearing on March 5, 2019, for the subdivision application and made a recommendation for conditional approval to the City Commission. Public hearing date for the City Commission is March 25, 2019. The hearing will be held in the City Commission chamber, 121 N Rouse Avenue at 6 pm. Board minutes and recommendations are attached to this report. SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, and plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis is a summary of the completed review. Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.130.A.5.b, BMC. In considering applications for subdivision approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: 1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act The preliminary plat has been prepared in accordance with the survey requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Montana. As noted in recommended condition of approval 2, the final plat must comply with State statute, Administrative Rules of Montana, and the Bozeman Municipal Code. A conditions of approval sheet must be included and updated with the required notations can be added as required by conditions or code. 2) Compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act The final plat must comply with the standards identified and referenced in the BMC. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as a condition 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. Sections 3 and 4 of this report identify conditions and code corrections necessary to meet all regulatory standards. Staff recommends conditions no. 2-6, 8, and code requirements 1-3 and 5-7 to address necessary documentation and compliance with adopted standards. Therefore, upon satisfaction of all conditions and code corrections the subdivision will comply with the local subdivision regulations. 390 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 18 of 30 3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act The application was received on May 5, 2017 and was deemed inadequate for further review on May 10, 2017 as the property was not annexed into the City. The City denied the annexation of the property into the city on October 23, 2017. The City notified the applicant again that the project was inadequate for further review on October 25, 2017 due to the property not being annexed and under the jurisdiction of the City. The City Commission approved the annexation of the property into the City on February 5, 2018. The applicant requested that the City review the application following the annexation proceedings, but did not update the application materials. The City deemed the application unacceptable for review on March 21, 2018 as the application did not meet the submittal requirements. Revised application materials were received on June 22, 2018. The City deemed the application acceptable for initial review on June 29, 2018. The City reviewed the application through the Development Review Committee and on July 23, 2018 the application was deemed inadequate for review. Revised materials were received on October 9, 2018 and the City deemed the revised materials acceptable for review. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application materials and deemed the application inadequate for review on November 1, 2018. The application was reviewed and found inadequate for further review on November 18, 2017. Revised materials were submitted on January 9, 2019. The Development Review Committee reviewed the application and it was found adequate for continued review on February 6, 2019. The application was found adequate for review on February 6, 2019. Public hearings were scheduled for March 5, 2019 and March 25, 2019. The hearings before the Planning Board and City Commission have been properly noticed as required by the Bozeman UDC. Based on the recommendation of the DRC and other applicable review agencies, as well as any public testimony received on the matter, the Planning Board must forward a recommendation in a report to the City Commission who will make the final decision on the applicant’s request. The Planning Board conducted a public hearing and reviewed the application on March 5, 2019. The Planning Board is the advisory body to the City Commission on this subdivision application. The Planning Board recommended approval of the project with the conditions and code provisions outlined in this staff report. No public comment was presented at the public hearing. The final decision for a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat with less than 50 lots must be made within 60 working days of the date it was deemed adequate. Pursuant to BMC 38.240.130 the city commission shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the subdivision application by April 18, 2019, unless there is a written extension from the developer, not to exceed one year. Public notice for this application was given as described in Appendix C and no comment was received as of the issuance of this staff report. 391 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 19 of 30 On February 27, 2019 this major subdivision staff report was completed and forwarded with a recommendation of conditional approval to the Planning Board. Planning Board made a favorable recommendation on March 5, 2019. 4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations Based on review of the Development Review Committee and the Department of Community Development all applicable regulations are met if all code requirements are satisfied. Pertinent code provisions and site specific requirements are included in this report for City Commission consideration in Sections 3 and 4. 5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and installation of any necessary utilities The final plat will provide and depict all necessary utilities and required utility easements. Condition of approval 7 requires that all easements, existing and proposed, must be accurately depicted and addressed on the final plat and in the final plat application. Public utilities will be located within dedicated street right of ways. Ten foot front yard utility easements are depicted on the preliminary plat and are proposed to be granted with the final plat in accordance with standards 6) The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument transferring the parcel The final plat will provide legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision. Manley Road frontage is proposed to be dedicated with this plat to a collector standard. Manley Road provides access to the proposed Bridger Vale Drive to be dedicated as a public street. All of the proposed lots have frontage to Bridger Vale Drive, a public street proposed required to be constructed to a higher standard than the local street section in City standards. A PUD relaxation is requested to allow the alternative street section. Physical access to each lot is proposed via a city alley located to the rear of the commercial and townhome lots. The final plat musts contain a statement requiring lot accesses to be built to the standards contained in this section, the city design standards and specifications policy, and the city modifications to state public works standard specifications unless modified through the approval of the PUD. The City accepts maintenance responsibility for Bridger Vale Drive excepting the landscaping and stormwater facilities in the median as the street exceeds local street standards and will be used by the broader community to access the EGRA. Condition of approval 13 is related to this issue. Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608 1) The effect on agriculture This subdivision will not impact agriculture. The subject property is designated as a residential mixed use and open space area according to the City of Bozeman Community Plan. The area is zoned for mixed use development. The site is currently use for grazing during the summer 392 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 20 of 30 months. The forage quality is low and the site is bifurcated by the primary access road to the East Gallatin Recreation Area (EGRA). 2) The effect on Agricultural water user facilities This subdivision will not impact agricultural water user facilities. No irrigation facilities are on the site. There is an existing ditch on the west side of the lot that passes under the drive approach to the EGRA. The ditch is the outlet to Glen Lake and conveys water to the East Gallatin River. 3) The effect on Local services Water/Sewer – Municipal water and sewer mains exist in the adjacent street rights of way, of Manley Road, Turtle Way and Gallatin Park Drive. The subdivider proposes to extend water and sewer mains to the commercial and townhome lots within Bridger Vale Drive and within the alleyway. In order to meet water system requirements a water main loop must be constructed to connect to a water main in Turtle Way. The existing water system and downstream sanitary sewer mains have adequate capacity to serve the subdivision. Transfer of water rights or cash in lieu of water rights must be provided per code provision in order to provide a long term water supply for the project. Streets – The Growth Policy and subdivision standards require adequate connectivity of the street grid to ensure sufficient infrastructure to serve the needs of the public and alleviate congestion. The preliminary plat layout extends Bridger Vale Drive from Manley Road to the EGRA. The street is proposed to exceed local street standards through a PUD relaxation. Bridger Vale Drive includes two separated travel lanes, parking on both sides of the street and a stormwater treatment bioswale in a median separating the travel lanes. City standards sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street. The City accepts maintenance responsibility for Bridger Vale Drive excepting the landscaping and stormwater facilities in the median as the street exceeds local street standards and will be used by the broader community to access the EGRA. Condition of approval 13 is related to this issue. The certificate of dedication for the final plat will list specific duties for maintenance. Manley Road right of way is proposed to be dedicated with this plat to provide a full collector standard along the frontage. The Manley Road frontage is required to be improved with this project. A special improvement district is in process for the street, stormwater and pedestrian and lighting improvements to Manley Road from Griffin Drive north to the city limits north of this project site. The intersection of Manley Road and Griffin Drive operates under a level of service allowed by the code. The applicant requests a waiver to the requirement to upgrade the intersection as allowed by the code. The Director of Public Works will issue a waiver as the waiver criteria have been met. The improvement to Griffin Drive and the intersection are in the approved City Capital Improvement Plan for year 2020 for the intersection and 2021 for the street improvement to Griffin Drive between N. 7th Avenue and Rouse Avenue. An alley provides access to the commercial and townhouse lots. 393 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 21 of 30 Street lighting is a component of the required street improvements. A special improvement lighting district is proposed to maintain these facilities. Conditions of approval 18-21, 24, and 25 are related to these findings. Police/Fire – The area of the subdivision is within the service area of both these departments. No concerns on service availability have been identified. Stormwater - The subdivision will construct storm water control facilities to conform to municipal code. A bioswale is proposed in the landscape median of Bridger Vale Drive. A detention pond is proposed on the west side of the open space. Inspection of installed facilities prior to final plat will verify that standards have been met. Maintenance of the storm water facilities is an obligation of the property owners’ association. This responsibility is addressed in the covenants proposed with the subdivision. Conditions 4, 5, 14, 15, 19 ensures this will be satisfied according to standards with the final plat. Parklands - The proposal meets the required park dedication and improvement standards if relaxations are granted through the PUD. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board will review the park master plan and the location and scope of improvements. A final park plan will be completed and approved with the final plat. The proposed park plan includes dedication of land with improvements to meet the obligation. The City Commission has approved a park master plan for the EGRA. Improvements proposed are in conformance to that plan. Plans and specification review by the Park Department will occur before installation of any work. Conditions of approval 4, 6 and 20 are related to this issue. BMC 38.42.090 authorizes the City to require waivers of right to protest creation of park maintenance districts. The new development will create two new parks and open spaces with public access with associated maintenance requirements. The residents will also be able to use other public parks throughout the City. A park maintenance special district facilitates maintenance in a manner that is proportionate to demand. The state recently changed the laws regarding creation of special districts. A waiver recorded with the final plat will ensure that the waiver is correctly drafted to meet state law requirements. Condition of approval 29 is related to this issue. 4) The effect on the Natural environment The subdivision will not significantly impact the natural environment. Manmade wetlands exist as part of a ditch along the west property boundary. The ditch is the outfall of Glen Lake to the south. A buffer is proposed from the wetlands associated with the outfall of Glenn Lake to protect their function. The proposed buffer to the Glen Lake outflow and associated wetlands exceeds code standards. An Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit is required to expand the access crossing of this ditch to construct Bridger Vale Drive at a width larger than the current crossing as the ditch flows into the East Gallatin River, a water of the United States under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps. 394 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 22 of 30 BMC 38.550.070 requires use of wells or surface water rights to irrigate parks and open spaces rather than municipal water supply. The application requests, through a PUD relaxation, to not irrigate parkland, open space or other public lands landscaping with a well. Very low levels of vinyl chloride have been detected within the subdivision. Therefore, the environmental consultants recommend against using ground water for irrigation. Institutional Controls are established to address the presence of the vinyl chloride. Condition 29 prohibits the use of wells for irrigation or potable use. The site is in an area of high groundwater, which may negatively impact future homes or cause illicit discharges into the sanitary sewer and over burden the surface drainage system. Condition 16 prohibits use of basements or crawl spaces and requires addition of a notation of this restriction on the condition of approvals sheet. This requirement will protect both individual home owners from future hazards of flooding and lessen burden on the public from illicit discharges. 5) The effect on Wildlife and wildlife habitat The subdivision will not significantly impact wildlife and wildlife habitat. The site has been substantially impacted by grazing, which has reduced wildlife habitat. There are no known endangered or threatened species on the property. Birds, waterfowl, and other small animals utilize the overflow from Glen Lake. The wetlands and ditch will have a thirty foot buffer and will not be significantly impacted. Comment from state Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks found no immediate negative effects. 6) The effect on Public health and safety With the recommended conditions of approval and required plat corrections, the subdivision will not significantly impact public health and safety. The intent of the regulations in Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision has been reviewed by the DRC, which has determined that it is in general compliance with the title with conditions and code provisions. Any other conditions deemed necessary to ensure compliance have been noted throughout this staff report. Condition of approval 1 requires full compliance with all applicable code requirements. To the east of the site exists the East Gallatin Landfill (EGL)which is designated by the Montana DEQ as a low-level Montana Comprehensive Cleanup and Responsibility Act (CECRA). The EGL accepted solid waste between 1962 and 1970 and is therefore approaching 50 years since it last accepted refuse. The Montana DEQ regulates cleanup of the site and the City has implemented a program for updating its monitoring of groundwater and soil vapor. In a recent study conducted by the Applicant in 2015, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) were detected in groundwater and soil vapor along the southern and eastern margins of the property at low levels with one indication of vinyl-chloride which exceeded the human health standard. Recognizing on-site conditions during discussions with the property owner prior to and at the time of annexation, city staff recommended and the Commission required the imposition of numerous institutional controls to protect the health and safety of future residents of the proposed 395 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 23 of 30 Bridger Vale development. The institutional controls were recorded as Document 2634483 at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder and a copy is attached to this staff report. The City and/or Montana Department of Environmental Quality may enforce the institutional controls. As noted, the City Commission previously reviewed the institutional controls at the time of annexation. See City Commission packet materials from the December 17, 2018 approval of the Bridger Vale Annexation.1 A Term of Annexation (#11) was required to protect future residents from potential exposure to the identified VOCs, which states: “All lots shall construct a sub-slab vapor mitigation system to eliminate any environmental concerns.” See condition #12. To protect public health and safety from any potential groundwater contamination the institutional controls also prohibit groundwater wells for irrigation. The potable water for the subdivision will be City water. In addition to the sub-slab depressuriation systems, slab foundations are required on the lots, which will prevent potential groundwater damage that might otherwise occur on structures with a full basement and limit vapor intrusion of soil gases that may contain VOCs. Another condition of approval requires notice to future property owners. The notice must provide that the owners be notified of the development’s classification of a PUD, and importantly, a listing of the environmental site assessments conducted for the property and a summary of the findings of each report and where the reports may be viewed. The conditions of approval also require a notice in the POA documents referencing the environmental conditions, and required mitigation along with a note on the conditions of approval sheet of the plat notifying property owners of the same. The purpose of noticing is to provide all available information to future residents at the time they determine to purchase a lot or a townhome. Another term of annexation required the institutional controls require the developer to establish a monitoring program that details sampling objectives and design, sampling location and frequency, sampling methods, testing methods, quality control and data storage to monitor ground vapor and the vapor mitigation systems. The declaration also allows access to the City and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality to conduct sampling. Subsequent requirements must be included in the property owners’ association documents to provide sufficient financial and technical resources to ensure the sub slab vapor mitigation plan continues in effect until otherwise agreed to by the City. The annexation agreement and declaration of institutional controls are attached to this report. Conditions of approval 8-12 are related to these issues. Overall, related to possible environmental contamination of the site from the adjacent EGL, the City Staff has reviewed available data and determined public health and safety can be protected through several means. At the time of annexation, the Commission required the developer and future property owners’ association to implement best practices for mitigating impacts through the imposition of institutional controls. The controls are already of record, run with the land, and 1 Available at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/doc/169930/Electronic.aspx. 396 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 24 of 30 are binding on all current and future owners.. During subdivision review the City must ensure that during development and platting the already required controls are implemented in the development process. This occurs through the use of covenants (enforceable by the City), through noticing to future purchasers, and notes on the face of the plat. Finally, the City Engineering Division has contracted with Water & Environmental Technologies to continue to refine a conceptual site model and determine where additional monitoring data is needed. All subdivisions must be reviewed against the criteria listed in 76-3-608.3.b-d, Mont Code Ann. and as a result, the Department of Community Development has reviewed this application against the listed criteria and further provides the following summary for submittal materials and requirements. Preliminary Plat Supplements A subdivision pre-application plan review was completed by the DRC on September 12, 2016. With the pre-application plan review application, waivers were requested from the materials required in Section 38.220.060 “Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements.” Some items were not waived and all required material has been addressed. Staff offers the following summary comments on the supplemental information required with Article 38.220.060, BMC. 38.220.060.A.1 Surface Water This subdivision will not significantly impact surface water. Manmade wetlands exist as part of a ditch along the west property boundary. The ditch is the outfall of Glen Lake to the south. A buffer is proposed from the wetlands associated with the outfall of Glenn Lake to protect their function. The proposed buffer to the Glen Lake outflow and associated wetlands exceeds code standards. An Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit is required to expand the access crossing of this ditch to construct Bridger Vale Drive at a width larger than the current crossing as the ditch flows into the East Gallatin River, a water of the United States under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps. 38.220.060.A.2 Floodplains No mapped 100-year floodplains impact the subject property. There are no designated floodplains on the site. 38.220.060.A.3 Groundwater With the recommended conditions of approval and required plat corrections, the subdivision will not significantly impact groundwater. The geotechnical investigation report is included in the application submittal. Groundwater was encountered in all test pit excavations. Groundwater depth is at 5.8 feet. Condition 16 is proposed to restrict basements and crawl spaces due to high groundwater. The ground vapors and water is contaminated with volatile organic compounds A Term of Annexation (#11) has been required to protect future residents from potential exposure to the identified VOCs, which states: “All lots shall construct a sub-slab vapor mitigation system to eliminate any environmental concerns.” This is condition of approval recommended by the 397 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 25 of 30 Development Review Committee for the PUD and preliminary plat. Slab foundations are proposed on the residential lots which will prevent potential groundwater damage that might otherwise occur on structures with a full basement. BMC 38.550.070 requires use of wells or surface water rights to irrigate parks and open spaces rather than municipal water supply. The application requests to not irrigate parkland, open space or other public lands landscaping with a well through a PUD relaxation. The property’s groundwater is impacted by VOC’s and the environmental consultants recommend against using ground water for irrigation. Condition of approval 28 prohibits the use of wells for irrigation or potable use. The City prefers not to use the municipal water supply for irrigation. Therefore, this relaxation is consistent with the on-site situation and City policy. 38.220.060.A.4 Geology, Soils and Slopes This subdivision will not significantly impact the geology, soils or slopes. The site is a majority loam with slopes ranging from 0-4%. There are no hazardous features associated with this soil type, however it is recommended that a geotechnical engineer certify any foundation design prior to construction. Additionally, due to high groundwater levels in the area it is advised against constructing buildings with full or partial basements A condition of approval is recommended to address this issue. There are two small areas of the lot that are classified as sanitary landfill. Soil analysis confirms that the levels of 71 constituent chemical were below the minimum detection level. In an effort to eliminate the remaining environmental concerns, sub-slab vapor mitigation systems will be required on all lots. The NRCS soils report for the lot is attached to the application with a soils analysis. A term of annexation required that the application file a declaration of institution controls for the Bridger Vale Annexation that requires among other things that the developer establish a monitoring program that details sampling objectives and design, sampling location and frequency, sampling methods, testing methods, quality control and data storage to monitor ground vapor, the vapor mitigation systems. The declaration also allows access to the City and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Subsequent requirements are included to be included in the property owners’ association documents to provide sufficient financial and technical resources to ensure the sub slab vapor mitigation plan continues in effect until otherwise agreed to by the City. The annexation agreement and declaration of intuitional controls are attached to this report 38.220.060.A.5 Vegetation This subdivision will not significantly impact vegetation. No substantial native vegetation was identified. The wetlands and ditch will have a thirty foot buffer that exceeds code standards and will not be significantly impacted. Comment from state Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks found no immediate negative effects. Wetlands are present along ditch outfall from Glen Lake. Other than the ditch and wetlands the area has been substantially disturbed by animals and grazing which has displaced most original plants. 38.220.060.A.6 Wildlife This subdivision will not significantly impact wildlife. See comments above under Criterion 5. 398 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 26 of 30 38.220.060.A.7 Historical Features No notable features are on the site. 38.220.060.A.8 Agriculture This subdivision will not significantly impact agriculture. See discussion above under primary review criteria. 38.220.060.A.9 Agricultural Water User Facilities This subdivision will not significantly impact agricultural water user facilities. See discussion above under primary review criteria. 38.220.060.A.10 Water and Sewer The subdivision will not significantly impact city water and sewer infrastructure. See discussion above under primary review criteria. The required design report has been provided. Formal plans and specifications will be prepared and reviewed after action on the preliminary plat. 38.220.060.A.11 Stormwater Management The subdivision will not significantly impact stormwater infrastructure. See discussion above under primary review criteria. Permits from the state for stormwater control will be required prior to any onsite construction. 38.220.060.A.12 Streets, Roads and Alleys The subdivision will not significantly impact the City’s street infrastructure and will provide adequate improvements to support the development. See discussion above under primary review criteria. 38.220.060.A.13 Utilities This subdivision will not significantly impact utilities. All private utilities servicing the subdivision will be installed underground. See discussion above under primary review criteria regarding extension of water and sewer. All private utilities are available in the area. 38.220.060.A.14 Educational Facilities Required materials are provided. The Bozeman School District has identified that adequate capacity is available. 38.220.060.A.15 Land Use The use proposed is mixed use residential which conforms to the future land use designation and zoning purposes. The property has a future land use designation of the Parks, Open Space, and Recreational Lands and is zoned REMU, Residential Emphasis Mixed Use and PLI, Public Lands and Institutions. Table C-16 of the Bozeman Community Plan shows both REMU and PLI zoning as implementing districts of the Parks, Open Space, and Recreational Lands. Although not in obvious accordance with the growth policy map, the property is in accordance with the 399 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 27 of 30 overall intent of the growth policy. The site is privately owned, and thus its current designation does not create any public right of use to the property. The applicant proposes to set aside a large portion of the property as park land and open space under PLI zoning and to substantially enhance the EGRA access drive by construction a street with on street parking, lighting, a landscaped median and pedestrian sidewalks. 38.220.060.A.16 Parks and Recreation Facilities See discussion above under primary review criteria. 38.220.060.A.17 Neighborhood Center Plan Provided by the existing and expanded EGRA including the new parkland and publicly accessible open space provided by this development. 38.220.060.A.18 Lighting Plan Subdivision or street lighting is required pursuant to BMC 38.570.030. All street lights installed must use LED light heads and must conform to the City’s requirement for cut-off shields as required by the City’s specifications. A Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) will be created prior to final plat application. 38.220.060.A.19 Miscellaneous The proposed subdivision will improve the access to public lands. Currently the project serves as an access to EGRA as stated in Section Q. The proposed subdivision will improve the access road to the EGRA, additionally it will promote connectivity adjacent developments and the EGRA. Paved trails through the open space and park in the subdivision will connect the EGRA to the neighboring developments. Potential hazards in the subdivision are levels of chemicals in the groundwater vapor in the site. While not at hazardous levels volatile organic compounds in the vapor of some groundwater are above the minimum detection levels. In an effort to alleviate the risk, sub slab vapor mitigation systems are required on all proposed structures. The proposed subdivision is outside of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Fire hydrants located within the subdivision will mitigate the risk of fire spreading past the WUI. 38.220.060.A.20 Affordable Housing The subdivision application proposes to meet the requirements for price controlled affordable housing set by BMC 38.380, by payment of cash in lieu. This is an allowed alternative for compliance. The applicant proposes to make necessary payments with each building permit of the development. This is acceptable. See the attached memo form the Affordable Housing Manager for current data. APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The property is zoned REMU, Residential Emphasis Mixed Use and PLI, Public Lands and Institutions. 400 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 28 of 30 The intent of the REMU District is to promote neighborhoods with supporting services that are substantially dominated by housing. A diversity of residential housing types should be built on the majority of any area within this category. Housing choice for a variety of households is desired and can include attached and small detached single-household dwellings, apartments, and live- work units. Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses. Variation in building massing, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape and may be larger than in the Residential category. Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, offices, and civic uses, are permitted at the ground floor. All uses should complement existing and planned residential uses. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation as needed in larger structures. Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged. Non- residential spaces should provide an interesting pedestrian experience with quality urban design for buildings, sites, and open spaces. This category is implemented at different scales. The details of implementing standards will vary with the scale. The category is appropriate near commercial centers and larger areas should have access on collector and arterial streets. Multi-household higher density urban development is expected. Any development within this category should have a well-integrated transportation and open space network which encourages pedestrian activity and provides ready access within and to adjacent development. The intent of the PLI district is to provide for major public and quasi-public uses outside of other districts. Not all public and quasi-public uses need to be classified PLI. Some may fit within another district, however larger areas will be designated PLI. Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands” in the Bozeman Community Plan. Parks, Open Space, and Recreational Lands. All publicly owned recreational lands, including parks, are included within this category, as well as certain private lands. These areas are generally open in character and may or may not be developed for active recreational purposes. This category includes conservation easements which may not be open for public use. APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the Planning Board and City Commission public hearings. BMC 38.220.420, Notice was provided by posting the site, mailing by certified mail to adjacent property owners and by first class mail to all other owners within 200 feet on February 15, 2019, and by legal advertisement publication in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on February 17 and 24, 2019. Content of the notice contained all elements required by Article 38.220., BMC. No public comment has been received. APPENDIX C – PROJECT BACKGROUND The applicant, Bridger Vale, LLC., annexed the 6.49 acres into the City limits and establish initial zoning of REMU, Residential Emphasis Mixed Use on 4.67 acres of the property and PLI, 401 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 29 of 30 Public, Open Space and Recreational Lands on the remaining 1.83 acres. The zoning was effective on February 7, 2019. The applicant previously proposed an application for a Growth Policy Map Amendment for the same property to change the future land use from Parks, Recreation and Open Space to Residential for the entire tract. The City Commission denied the request following a public hearing on May 11, 2015. The site is currently vacant and being used for cattle grazing with the primary access road for the East Gallatin Recreation Area (EGRA) running through the property. Gallatin Park industrial subdivision is located across Manley Road from the subject property and contains office, service, warehousing, accessory apartments, commercial retail services and other mixed industrial uses. Sunfish Park Minor Subdivision is located to the south and is a 5-lot residential subdivision located on Turtle Way. To the east of the site, there is a former landfill that is a low-level Montana Comprehensive Cleanup and Responsibility Act (CECRA) site and is no longer in operation. Cleanup of the site is managed by the Montana DEQ. In a recent study conducted in 2015, Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) that are not naturally occurring were detected in groundwater and soil vapor along the southern and eastern margins of the property at low levels with one indication of vinyl- chloride which exceeded the human health standard. A Term of Annexation was adopted to protect future residents from potential exposure to the identified VOCs, which states: “All lots shall construct a sub-slab vapor mitigation system to eliminate any environmental concerns.” Groundwater wells are restricted on this property. Another term of annexation required that the application file a declaration of institution controls for the Bridger Vale Annexation that requires among other things that the developer establish a monitoring program that details sampling objectives and design, sampling location and frequency, sampling methods, testing methods, quality control and data storage to monitor ground vapor, the vapor mitigation systems. The declaration also allows access to the City and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. Subsequent requirements are included to be included in the property owners’ association documents to provide sufficient financial and technical resources to ensure the sub slab vapor mitigation plan continues in effect until otherwise agreed to by the City. The annexation agreement and declaration of intuitional controls are attached to this report. APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION Owner/Applicant: Bridger Vale LLC, PO Box 930 Manhattan, MT 59741 Representatives: C&H Engineering and Surveying Inc., 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 Report By: Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager 402 17231, City Commission Staff Report – Bridger Vale Subdivision Page 30 of 30 FISCAL EFFECTS The development will generate the typical costs and revenues of residential and commercial development. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. Application materials – Available through the Laserfiche archive linked agenda materials. Public Comment: None to date Bridger Vale Annexation Agreement Bridger Vale Declaration of Institutional Controls Planning Board minutes March 5, 2019. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Subdivision Committee email March 8, 2019. The Community Affordable Housing Board minutes March 13, 2019 Application 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 City Planning Board March 5th, 2019 | 7:00 PM | City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue A. 07:04:12 PM (00:00:01) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call Present were: • Cathy Costakis • Jennifer Madgic • George Thompson (Chair) • Deputy Mayor Chris Mehl (Commission Liaison) • Paul Spitler • Lauren Waterton • Mark Egge • Jerry Pape B. 07:04:45 PM (00:00:34) Changes to the Agenda-none C. 07:04:51 PM (00:00:40) Minutes for Approval • 2.19.19 Minutes (PDF) o 2.19.19 Video Link 07:04:56 PM (00:00:45) MOTION: I move to approve the February 19th minutes: Chris Mehl. 07:04:58 PM (00:00:47) SECONDED: Jerry Pape 07:04:59 PM (00:00:48) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries Unanimously. D. 07:05:09 PM (00:00:58) Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. None. E. Special Presentations 1. 07:05:50 PM (00:01:39) Seat at the Table Update (Jennifer Boyer) Jennifer Boyer gave a brief overview of the initiative. 07:09:13 PM (00:05:02) Boyer summarized the results of the initiative, including top responses, concerns, and priorities of participants. 07:15:57 PM (00:11:46) A quick question and comment period took place. F. Action Items 1. 07:18:16 PM (00:14:05) Bridger Vale Subdivision Preliminary Plat 17231 (Krueger) A Preliminary Plat application to allow the subdivision of 6.48 acres into twenty townhome lots, one commercial lot, one city park lot, one open space lot with an associated street and alley. The application 433 includes a concurrent Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to allow the mixed residential and commercial development with relaxations to zoning regulations requested for park frontage, street design and a request for concurrent construction. • 17231 Staff Report • 17231 Application Materials • 17231 Site & Landscape Plans • 17231 Supporting Studies, Plans & Reports (Environmental, Traffic, Stormwater, etc.) • 17231 Subdivision Declaration of Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions Krueger presented the application to the board. 07:33:17 PM (00:29:06) Krueger took questions from the board regarding the location of the old landfill and related environmental concerns, nearby zoning, and the limited back yard area. 07:46:16 PM (00:42:05) Krueger answered a more questions from the board regarding the time frame and progression of the project as well as designations and land use. 07:58:12 PM (00:54:01) Krueger answered questions about parking, drive and pedestrian access, further environmental and legal concerns, and the cash in lieu for affordable housing. 08:09:44 PM (01:05:33) Krueger answered questions about the Staff Report. 08:16:12 PM (01:12:01) Per Hjalmarsson of C & H Engineering, representing the applicant, introduced the team used for this project and gave a presentation on the project. 08:24:57 PM (01:20:46) Lessa Racow, Landscape Architect with WGM Group, presented the landscape plan on behalf of the applicant. 08:28:02 PM (01:23:51) Hjalmarsson concluded his presentation. 08:29:35 PM (01:25:24) Hjalmarsson answered questions from the Board regarding environmental concerns and open land use. 08:35:01 PM (01:30:50) Andy Ebbighausen of Ebbighausen Homes from the applicant team answered questions from regarding the garage access and placement, yards, and the conditions for the project. 08:45:14 PM (01:41:03) Krueger informed the board of the earlier requested cash in lieu of affordable housing amount. 08:45:43 PM (01:41:32) PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 08:46:17 PM (01:42:06) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 17321 and move to recommend approval of the subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions: Mark Egge. 08:46:35 PM (01:42:24) SECONDED: Jerry Pape. 08:46:51 PM (01:42:40) The Board commented on the Motion and the project. 434 08:54:22 PM (01:50:11) VOTE: Motion Passes 7-1. 2. 08:54:52 PM (01:50:41) 2019 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan Adoption as a Neighborhood Plan Growth Policy Amendment 18197 (Jadin/Naumann) • 18197 Staff Report • 18197 Downtown Plan Draft • 18197 Public Comment 08:57:07 PM (01:52:56) City Planner Addi Jadin gave a presentation on the 2019 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan. 09:10:13 PM (02:06:02) Jadin went over future actions, including the expected City Commission dates of March 25th 2019 for the Resolution of Intent and the April 15th 2019 Resolution to Adopt. Also mentioned is a special presentation by the Consultants that helped put together the plan that is scheduled for April 1st, 2019. 09:11:57 PM (02:07:46) Chris Naumann of reiterated how the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan relates to the Growth Policy. 09:13:54 PM (02:09:43) Naumann answered questions from the board about parking, the NCOD, transition zones, the B3 boundary, and the organization of the report itself. 09:26:49 PM (02:22:38) PUBLIC COMMENT - Paul Neubauer (210 S Bozeman Ave.) spoke of his involvement in the Plan and his concerns with parking credits and incentives for rental housing. 09:31:37 PM (02:27:26) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby move to adopt the findings presented in the staff report and approve the Planning Board Resolution 5041 2019-01, recommending to the City Commission the adoption of the 2019 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan as a neighborhood plan under the Growth Policy - Growth Policy Amendment Application 18197 with contingencies necessary to complete the application processing and the correction to the text submitted by the staff: Jerry Pape. 09:32:22 PM (02:28:11) SECONDED: Jennifer Madgic. 09:32:29 PM (02:28:18) The Board commented on the Plan. Deputy Mayor Mehl pointed out there was a mislabeling of the Resolution in the form used for the Motion, and that the correct Resolution number was 2019-01. 09:45:54 PM (02:41:43) AMENDMENT: I amend my Motion to reflect the fact: Jerry Pape. 09:46:00 PM (02:41:49) SECONDED: Jennifer Madgic. 09:46:11 PM (02:42:00) Chair Thompson commented on the Plan. 09:47:54 PM (02:43:43) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries Unanimously. G. 09:48:09 PM (02:43:58) FYI/Discussion 1. Future Agenda Items 435 H. 09:48:12 PM (02:44:01) Adjournment For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.net This board generally meets the first and third Tuesday of the month at 7:00pm Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 436 1 Brian Krueger From:Mitchell Overton Sent:Friday, March 8, 2019 3:47 PM To:Brian Krueger Cc:'Richard Shanahan'; 'Brian Close'; 'Katie Bills-Walsh' Subject:RE: Two PUD's for Parkland Review Brian:  RPAB Sub Review motion, comments, and condition below.  RPAB: please review for anything missing.    1) Cottonwood and Ida PUD 18516 request cash in lieu of parkland for .73 acres at the City’s adopted per sq. ft.  rate.    a. Improvements / installation of parking area for Depot Park appropriate and aligns with future Front  Street Path development and provides walkable access to Story Mill Spur and Story Mill Community  Park.   b. Open public movement through development site encouraged and inviting.  c. .73 acres Developer proposed cash‐in‐lieu of parkland dedication at $1.50/sq.ft. = $47,6982 deemed  acceptable.  i. Motion passed for above three items     2. Bridger Vale PUD 17232 and subdivision 17231 request dedication of parkland with relaxations to park frontage  and park frontage loss mitigation.   a. Park entrance improvements with on street parking.  b. Development of open space aggregated to Glen Lake Rotary Park.  c. Dedicated parkland found acceptable with alley eliminating encroachment issues, property aggregated  to Glen Lake Rotary Park, trail connecting into Glen Lake Rotary Park trail system, and condition of  installation of pet waste station.  i. Motion to approve park plan and parking relaxation approved with condition of installation of  pet waste station in dedicated parkland.       Mitchell J.  Overton, MS, CPRP  Director, Parks and Recreation Department  City of Bozeman, MT  (o)406‐582‐3222  (c)406‐595‐7020  www.bozeman.net     From: Mitchell Overton   Sent: Monday, March 4, 2019 4:59 PM  To: Richard Shanahan <richard@shanahanarchitects.com>; 'Brian Close' <taxatty123@gmail.com>; Katie Bills‐Walsh  <katie.j.bills@gmail.com>  Subject: FW: Two PUD's for Parkland Review    437 2 RPAB Subdivision Review Materials.  Meeting scheduled for this Friday at 2pm at Stiff Building Basement Conference Room.    Mitchell J.  Overton, MS, CPRP  Director, Parks and Recreation Department  City of Bozeman, MT  (o)406‐582‐3222  (c)406‐595‐7020  www.bozeman.net     From: Mitchell Overton   Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 3:47 PM  To: Melanie Eubank <MEubank@BOZEMAN.NET>  Cc: Brian Krueger <BKrueger@BOZEMAN.NET>; Thom White <TWhite@BOZEMAN.NET>  Subject: FW: Two PUD's for Parkland Review    Melanie:  Brian K. has two more developments to add to the next RPAB Subd. Review.  Please schedule with the Committee Chair  as appropriate.    Thanks,    Mitchell J.  Overton, MS, CPRP  Director, Parks and Recreation Department  City of Bozeman, MT  (o)406‐582‐3222  (c)406‐595‐7020  www.bozeman.net     From: Brian Krueger   Sent: Friday, March 1, 2019 12:34 PM  To: Thom White <TWhite@BOZEMAN.NET>  Cc: Mitchell Overton <MOverton@BOZEMAN.NET>  Subject: Two PUD's for Parkland Review    Hello,    I have two projects that need an RPAB recommendation. They are scheduled for City Commission on March 25 for public  hearing. Please let me know when you will review as I would like to invite the applicants and to attend. Thanks.    1) Cottonwood and Ida PUD 18516 request cash in lieu of parkland for .73 acres at the City’s adopted per sq. ft.  rate.  See attached site usage plan top left corner of plan sheet.  2) Bridger Vale PUD 17232 and subdivision 17231 request dedication of parkland with relaxations to park frontage  and park frontage loss mitigation. See attached park plans and narrative.  438 3   Brian Krueger | Development Review Manager, Community Development   City of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 406.582.2259 | bkrueger@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net   439 Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board March 13th, 2019 | 8 AM | City Hall Commission Room: 121 N. Rouse Ave A. 08:02:18 AM (00:01:53) Call meeting to order & Roll Call  Excused Absence: Steve Wheeler Present Were:  Brian Guyer (Ex-Aficionado Member)  Terry Cunningham (Commission Liaison)  Greg Stratton  Noel Seeburg  Kevin Thane (Board Chair)  Jody Bartz  Dulaney Collins  Martin Matsen (Staff Liaison) B. 08:02:27 AM (00:02:01) Changes to the Agenda C. 08:02:31 AM (00:02:06) Public Comment Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. D. 08:03:46 AM (00:03:21) Minutes for Approval  2.13.19 Minutes (PDF) o 2.13.19 Video Link 08:03:43 AM (00:03:18) MOTION to approve minutes: Greg Stratton 08:03:49 AM (00:03:24) MOTION SECONDED: Jodi Bartz 08:04:07 AM (00:03:41) Chair Thane provided some corrections to the February 13th meeting minutes: 1. Commissioner Cunningham was present. 2. Typo on p.2 at 8:25 AM - bonds, not “bonda” 08:04:47 AM (00:04:22) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries 440 E. Action Items 1. 08:05:16 AM (00:04:51) Consideration and Recommendation of the Affordable Housing Plan for Bridger Vale Subdivision 17231 (Krueger) A Preliminary Plat application to allow the subdivision of 6.48 acres into twenty townhome lots, one commercial lot, one city park lot, one open space lot with an associated street and alley. The application includes a concurrent Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to allow the mixed residential and commercial development with relaxations to regulations requested for required park frontage, REMU setbacks, public lands irrigation, street design and a request for concurrent construction.  17231 Affordable Housing Recommendation  17231 Affordable Housing Plan Application  17231 PUD Site Plan 08:05:35 AM (00:05:10) Planner and Development Review Manager, Brian Krueger presented on behalf of staff and introduced the project. The 20 proposed townhome lots are subject to the affordable housing requirements. The applicant is proposing $9,788.00 per dwelling unit in cash-in- lieu for the two required units. The amount due at the time of final plat / occupancy will be recalculated in that year’s dollars as the proposed amount is for the 2018 requirements. 08:08:07 AM (00:07:41) Mr. Krueger and Director of Community Development, Marty Matsen responded to questions from Chair Thane regarding how the affordable housing ordinance will be applied. 08:16:20 AM (00:15:54) Andy Ebbighausen, project builder spoke on behalf of the applicant. They had originally planned on providing condos to fill the affordable housing requirement, but the ordinance had changed to exclude condos since they began the project and so they changed their proposal to cash-in-lieu funds to meet the ordinance requirement. 08:18:16 AM (00:17:51) Mr. Ebbighausen responded to board member questions regarding their target market and their original plan to meet the affordable housing ordinance requirements before condos were removed. 08:22:27 AM (00:22:02) Public Comment Opportunity 08:22:45 AM (00:22:19) MOTION to recommend approval of the project’s affordable housing proposal provided the wording is changed to meet the revised affordable housing ordinance: Kevin Thane 08:22:53 AM (00:22:28) MOTION SECONDED: Greg Stratton 08:22:54 AM (00:22:29) VOTE: Motion Carries 5-0 441 2. 08:24:37 AM (00:24:12) Consideration and Recommendation of the Affordable Housing Plan for Cottonwood and Ida Planned Unit Development 18516 (Krueger) A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to allow a mixed residential and commercial development with relaxations to zoning regulations requested for apartment building use, building height parking, street design, restaurant design, transparency, front setbacks and a request for concurrent construction.  18516 PPUD Project Introduction  18516 PPUD Project Overview & PUD Information  18516 PPUD Building Design Objectives  18516 PPUD Alignment of District Goals & Design Objectives 08:24:44 AM (00:24:19) Mr. Krueger introduced the project and reviewed the proposed affordable housing requirements. The project proposes 92 dwelling units as apartments in various configurations. 08:28:01 AM (00:27:35) Commissioner Cunningham asked if this is the first project where they voluntarily offered affordable housing units to earn Planned Unit Development (PUD) performance points. In this case, the applicant is proposing affordable rental units, which is allowed through the PUD process. 08:31:48 AM (00:31:23) Erik Nelson of Think Tank Design Group introduced himself and the project and explained that they are not applying for any tax credits, but that the project is privately funded. Mr. Nelson explained that this is a mixed use development with 24,700 sq. ft. of commercial space, 8,000 sq. ft. of plaza space, Leed certified, with 92 residential dwellings including a mix of for sale and rental units. The project also contains 200 parking spaces and 50,000 sq. ft. of open space. 08:42:09 AM (00:41:44) Mr. Nelson responded to questions from board members and briefly discussed the affordable units and their efforts to work with HRDC to create an MOU to manage the units that are geared toward 65% of AMI. Following, Mr. Nelson responded to questions regarding longevity and the future goals of the affordable units. 09:04:16 AM (01:03:51) Mr. Nelson responded to questions regarding the Leed certification goal of the project. 09:06:14 AM (01:05:49) MOTION to support the proposed 21 points for the PUD process because of the affordable housing component of the project: Kevin Thane 09:06:40 AM (01:06:15) MOTION SECONDED: Jody Bartz 09:06:49 AM (01:06:24) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion carries unanimously 442 3. 09:07:20 AM (01:06:55) Timber Ridge Project (Summit Housing / HRDC) Presentation and preliminary request for funding for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) application. 09:08:02 AM (01:07:37) Rusty Snow of Summit Housing Group presented on behalf of the Timber Ridge affordable housing project. Mr. Snow provided an overview of the project and explained that this is a second phase, related to the Stoneridge Housing project and offers all 40 units at an affordable rate of 60% AMI down to 40% AMI affordability. Mr. Snow explained that Summit Housing Group does nothing but affordable housing projects and has produced 1,646 units throughout the western United States. Timber Ridge will serve a wide range of AMI: 25% at 60% AMI, 65% at 50% AMI and 10% at 40% AMI. 09:16:49 AM (01:16:24) Mr. Snow explained the process they’re going through with Montana Board of Housing – their letter of intent (LOI) is due in April when all of the applicants will submit and that presentations follow roughly 60 days later (90 days from now). 09:19:43 AM (01:19:18) Mr. Snow responded to questions from board members regarding past funding experiences with other municipalities. 09:25:40 AM (01:25:15) MOTION that CAHAB continue to support the Timber Ridge housing project and provide a letter of support that Summit Housing can take forward to the Montana Board of Housing presentation. Additionally, CAHAB will recommend funding of $25,000. 09:26:52 AM (01:26:27) MOTION SECONDED: Greg Stratton 09:26:59 AM (01:26:34) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries 09:27:20 AM (01:26:55) Director Matsen suggested the board be more open ended with the dollar amount recommended or to allow for additional funds. 09:27:59 AM (01:27:34) REVISED MOTION (friendly amendment): MOTION that CAHAB continue to support the Timber Ridge housing project and provide a letter of support that Summit Housing can take forward to the Montana Board of Housing presentation. Additionally, CAHAB will recommend a financial commitment of support to be determined at a later time. 09:28:11 AM (01:27:46) Approval of the Letter to the Commission in support of the GMD Development Project on Tschache Lane Mr. Steve Dymoke of GMD Development provided a status update on the GMD Development on Tschache Lane. 09:30:22 AM (01:29:57) Board members discussed the letter to the City Commission recommending $500,000 funding for the project. Board member Stratton recommended that they add wording to spread out the funding over the course of one to three fiscal years or as needed. 443 09:32:47 AM (01:32:22) MOTION to forward letter to City Commission with suggested changes: Kevin Thane 09:32:47 AM (01:32:22) VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries Unanimously (Motion and Vote were done in one statement) 4. Continued Discussion of CAHAB 2019 Goals and Priorities F. Non-Action Items 1. Housing Needs Assessment Discussion/Comments G. FYI/Discussion 1. 09:33:20 AM (01:32:55)Affordable Housing Action Plan / Program Mgr. Update (Matsen) 2. 09:35:25 AM (01:35:00) HRDC Monthly update (Guyer)  Willow Springs Project  Boulevard Apartments 3. 09:37:22 AM (01:36:57) GAR Gallatin Assoc. of Realtors Summary (Seeburg) 4. 09:38:04 AM (01:37:39) Reminder: Ethics Training Scheduled for 10 AM on March 27th, 2019 H. 09:38:20 AM (01:37:54) Adjournment | 9:30 AM For more information please contact Lacie Kloosterhof at lkloosterhof@bozeman.net. This board generally meets the second Wednesday of each month at 8:00 AM Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 444 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION Prepared for: Ebbighausen Homes, Inc P.O. Box 930 Manhattan, MT 59741 Prepared by: Project Number: 14486 January 2019 445 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 TABLE OF CONTENTS BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CITY OF BOZEMAN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS 1.1 FORM A1 1.2 FORM PP (SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT REQUIRED MATERIALS) 1.3 FORM PP1 (SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST) 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 EMAILS BETWEEN CITY OF BOZEMAN, C&H ENGINEERING AND DOUG CHANDLER CONCERNING PUD, ANNEXATION, GMA AND INITIAL ZONING 2.2 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISOIN PREAPPLICATION (ORIGINAL SUBMITTAL) 2.3 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION PREAPPLICATION AND PUD CONCEPT PLAN – STAFF REPORTS 2.4 NARRATIVE RESPONSE TO PRE-APPLICATION COMMENTS 3. PLAT MAP AND SUPPORTING SUPPLEMENTS 3.1 FORM N1 AND LIST OF ADJOINERS 3.2 USGS VICINITY MAP 3.3 PRELIMINARY PLAT MAP 3.4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PAGE 3.5 OVERALL PUD SITE PLAN 3.6 WEED MANAGEMENT PLAN 3.7 PLATTING CERTIFICATE 4. LEGAL 4.1 ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION 4.2 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 5. ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENTS 5.1 WATERS OF THE US WETLAND DELINEATION (VAUGHN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES) 5.2 SUPPLEMENTAL PLAT INFORMATION 6. MASTER PARK PLAN AND LANDSCAPING PLAN 7. PHOTOMETRICS 7.1 INTERSECTION PHOTOMETRICS AND LIGHTING PLAN 7.2 INTERSECTION LIGHT SUBMITTAL 8. WATER AND SEWER DESIGN REPORT 9. STORMWATER DESIGN REPORT AND STORMWATER MAINTENANCE PLAN 10. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY (ABELIN TRAFFIC) 11. ENVIRONMENTAL SUPPLEMENTS 11.1 TETRA TECH, INC. - ENVIRONMENTAL TESTING ASSESMENT 11.2 VAPOR BARRIER DETAILS 12. RESOURCE TECHNOLOGIES-ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING REPORT 13. HYDROMETRICS– OLD BOZEMAN LANDFILL 446 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 TABLE OF CONTENTS 14. RESPONSE LETTERS 14.1 MONTANA FISH WILDLIFE AND PARKS 14.2 BOZEMAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS 14.3 BOZEMAN HEALTH 14.4 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 14.5 CENTURY LINK 15. AFFORDABLE HOUSING 15.1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN APPLICATION (CIL) 15.2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING CIL ANALYSIS 16. PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT (WGM GROUP) 17. GRIFFIN DRIVE AND MANLEY ROAD LOS WAIVER REQUEST 447 PP Preliminary Plat Required Materials PP Page 1 of 2 Revision Date 1-18-18 Required Forms: A1, PP1, N1, SVAR (if variance) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT 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 subdivision preliminary plat checklist form PP1. 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. STATISTICS 1. Subdivision Type: First Minor Subdivision from a Tract of Record First Minor Subdivision from a Tract of Record with variance Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision from a Tract of Record First Major Subdivision 2. Total Number or Lots: 3. Lots by Proposed Uses: Residential, single household City Park Residential, multi household Manufactured Home Space Planned Unit Development Recreational Vehicle Space Condominium Unit Commercial Townhouse Industrial Common Open Space Restricted Development Other: 448 Preliminary Plat Required Materials PP Page 2 of 2 Revision Date 1-18-18 Required Forms: A1, PP1, N1, SVAR (if variance) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: APPLICATION FEE Base fee $1,888 Minor or $ 3,004 Major Plus $74 per lot Plus $6.50 noticing fee per each physically contiguous (touching) property owner 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 449 PP1 Preliminary Plat Checklist PP1 Page 1 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1, PP, SVAR (if variance) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: SUBDIVISON PRELIMINARY PLAT CHECKLIST GENERAL INFORMATION The preliminary plat submittal must include the following information. Please refer to Section 38.41.040, BMC for the specific requirements for each item. 1. All information required with the pre-application plan, as outlined in Section 38.41.030 (Subdivision Pre-application Plan), BMC. See checklist PA1. 2. Name and location of the subdivision, scale, scale bar, north arrow, date of preparation, lots and blocks (designated by number), the dimensions and area of each lot, and the use of each lot, if other than for single household. 3. All streets, roads, alleys, avenues, highways, and easements; the width of the right-of-way, grades, and curvature of each; existing and proposed road and street names; and proposed location of intersections for any subdivision requiring access to arterial or collector highways. 4. The names of adjoining platted subdivisions and numbers of adjoining certificates of survey. 5. An approximate survey of the exterior boundaries of the platted tract with bearings, distances, and curve data indicated outside of the boundary lines. When the plat is bounded by an irregular shoreline or a body of water, the bearings and distances of a closing meander traverse shall be given. 6. The approximate location of all section corners or legal subdivision corners of sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary. 7. If the improvements required are to be completed in phases after the final plat is filed, the approximate area of each phase shall be shown on the plat. 8. Ground contours at 2-foot intervals if slope is under 10 percent; 5-foot intervals if slope is between 10 and 15 percent; and 10-foot intervals if slope is 15 percent or greater. 9. List of waivers granted from the requirements of Section 38.41.060 (Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements), BMC during the pre-application process. 10. Request for exemption from Montana Department of Environmental Quality Review as described in Section 38.41.040.11 (Request for Exemption from MDEQ Review), BMC. 11. All appropriate certificates (refer to Chapter 38.06, BMC). 12. All preliminary plat supplements required for all subdivisions: Preliminary Plat Supplements Required for All Subdivisions A. A map showing all adjacent sections of land, subdivision, certificates of survey, streets and roads B. Map of entire subdivision on either an 8½-inch x 11-inch, 8½-inch x 14-inch, or 11-inch x 17-inch sheet C. A written statement describing any requested subdivision variance(s) and the facts of hardship upon which the request is based. Refer to Chapter 38.35 (Variance, Deviation and Appeal Procedures), BMC. See checklist SVAR D. Covenants, Restrictions and Articles of Incorporation for the Property Owners’ Association E. Encroachment permits or a letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new streets, easements, rights-of way or driveways intersect State, County, or City highways, streets or roads F. A letter of approval or preliminary approval from the City of Bozeman where a zoning change is necessary 450 Preliminary Plat Checklist PP1 Page 2 of 2 Revision Date 1-05-16 Required Forms: A1, N1, PP, SVAR (if variance) Recommended Forms: Required Forms: G. A draft of such other appropriate certificates H. Provision for maintenance of all streets (including emergency access), parks, and other required improvements if not dedicated to the public, or if private I. Profile sheets for street grades greater than 5 percent J. If an authorized representative signs on behalf of an owner of record, a copy of the authorization shall be provided K. A Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed Control District for control of noxious weeds L. A preliminary platting certificate prepared by a Montana title company 13. All preliminary plat supplements not waived at pre-application review by the Development Review Committee. Please refer to Section 38.41.060, BMC for the specific requirements for each item. Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements Waived A. Surface water B. Floodplains C. Groundwater D. Geology, soils and slope E. Vegetation F. Wildlife G. Historical features H. Agriculture I. Agriculture water user facilities J. Water and sewer K. Stormwater management L. Streets, roads and alleys M. Utilities N. Educational facilities O. Land use P Parks and recreation facilities Q. Neighborhood center plan R. Lighting plan S. Affordable Housing T. Miscellaneous 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 451 1 Adam Morse From:Chris Saunders <csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent:Friday, April 01, 2016 1:24 PM To:'Doug Chandler' Cc:Mike Balch; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'; Ted Campbell (bozemanokie@gmail.com); William H. Anderson (E-mail) Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments Doug, I think you captured the conversation well. One adjustment, the annexation must be accompanied by a zone map amendment as well. Applicant could propose PLI on areas the PUD proposed for public open space and another zoning district on the balance. REMU district was suggested during the informal by the applicant. Chris S From:Doug Chandler [mailto:doug@alliedengineering.com]Sent:Friday, April 01, 2016 12:19 PMTo:Chris Saunders Cc:Mike Balch; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'; Ted Campbell (bozemanokie@gmail.com); William H. Anderson (E-mail) Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments Chris –Thanks for your time answering questions during our phone conversation today.This email summarizes my interpretation of our phone call. The city can not make any deals or promises except their normal processing of applications, so the next move has to be applications by the developer or possibly some other actions such as an easement or donation deal between the landowner and say the Rotary Club regarding the promise to dedicate the land for public park if …..list of conditions….I wasn’t totally clear on the easement process or intents, but if the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary could be of any assistance in getting this project to happen, we would do have a qualified 501C3 and would probably consider acting as a transfer entity if advantageous or needed. The City could process annexation and PUD applications simultaneously.Again, they couldn’t make any promises like if the annexation…… then the PUD will be approved…,but either party would have the opportunity to say nay about either application if there was something they didn’t like or didn’t meet criteria. The Annexation/zoning application would presumably have the PLI zoning designation if no amendment to the Growth Policy.The PUD, which would include townhomes, doesn’t have any particular limit to % of land that stays within the base zoning, but the PUD has various systems of judging public benefit including a point system that awards (for example) 1.25 points for each 1% of land (above and beyond normal park land requirements I believe) that is open space accessible to the public.A PUD needs at least 20 points.I don’t know all the details of the scoring system, but it seems like this project is in the ballpark at least.I think the developer would just need to sit down with the rules and regulations and applications for PUD and start checking off the boxes and studying the criteria. In summary, it appears to me that the next move is the developer’s, and that the City cant make any promises or provide any recommended approaches, but no fatal flaws with the idea of proceeding with annexation and PUD without a growth Policy Amendment came up in our conversation.The Bozeman Sunrise Rotary is behind this idea and believe it is the best realistic development concept for the park and community, and we will continue supporting the idea however possible.Please keep us informed of any progress as we are trying to finish up a revision to the Park Master 452 2 Plan and would like to include the extra land area, entry way improvements, and stream restoration of this area in the revised Park master plan. Chris –please feel free to add any corrections or additions to this email. Doug Chandler, PhD, PE President Allied Engineering Services, Inc. 32 Discovery Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 | Tel: (406) 582-0221 x209 | Cell: (406) 579-2150 Email:doug@alliedengineering.com |Web:www.alliedengineering.com From:Doug Chandler Sent:Monday, March 21, 2016 4:29 PM To:csaunders@bozeman.net Cc:Mike Balch; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'; Ted Campbell (bozemanokie@gmail.com); William H. Anderson (E-mail) Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments Thanks for the response Chris.As per my phone message, I would like to continue the discussion and I am hoping you don’t mind conducting a discussion via email.I have a few points inserted into your message below in red. Doug Chandler, PhD, PE President Allied Engineering Services, Inc. 32 Discovery Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 | Tel: (406) 582-0221 x209 | Cell: (406) 579-2150 Email:doug@alliedengineering.com |Web:www.alliedengineering.com From:Chris Saunders [mailto:csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET]Sent:Monday, March 21, 2016 12:17 PM To:Doug Chandler Cc:Mike Balch; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'; Ted Campbell (bozemanokie@gmail.com); William H. Anderson (E-mail) Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments Doug, This is a classic which comes first type of situation. The PUD must conform to the growth policy which shows Parks, open space, and recreational lands designation. If the City had adopted a detailed park plan for EGRA that did not include the area north of the road then it could possibly be argued that the more specific plan should take precedent.The current master plan for this park does not include this area, and the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club would like to include it in the revised Master Plan that we are working on, but we don’t think it is appropriate to include it without some agreement and approval between the City and the landowner.However,I am not certain whether the Commission would look favorably on a specific plan that didn't include all of the area generally designated as park.We have talked to three of the five Commissioners in our Rotary Club and I think the Commission is in favor of this development.Is there a way to take this issue/question directly to them? The City Commission is in the difficult position of having to consider a potential quasi-judicial decision (PUD) as it relates to a legislative decision for the growth policy amendment. The CC and the landowner are both in the difficult position that the CC can't make the approval of a growth policy amendment conditional on a specific development plan.I agree this is difficult –which is part of the reason I suggest the PUD moving forward without the GPA.If the GPA was amended without a specific plan, the developer or a subsequent owner could develop the entire area as high density residential, commercial (for REMU designation) or whatever 453 3 change was agreed to in the GPA, when in fact, the specific plan is important when considering and approving this development.The Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club likes and supports this plan because of its sensitivity and improvements to the Park, and we think a PUD approval that shows the details of the plan is the best way to develop and implement a favorable plan for the park.I went back and looked again at Table C-16 in the growth policy which addresses the correlation between planning and zoning. Based on that language and looking at the site plan criteria 38.19.100.A.1 I conclude the GPA needs to come first. This property is the "perfect storm" of complexities that makes identifying the path forward challenging.Its not really that complex if you do the PUD first.What you approve is what you get, or if the developer doesn’t follow through with that plan for some reason, the GPA still stands as is.The time to most easily make the case for a map change is during the overall growth policy update since the plan as a whole is being rebalanced and competing priorities are being considered. An amendment gives less latitude for those trade offs. As reflected in the informal comments, Staff is generally supportive of the outcome of the project. The challenge is how to most effectively get there is a timely manner.We believe it is a PUD proceeding without changing the existing Growth Policy. Chris –can you send me a link to the Growth Policy?I am having trouble getting it to load from the city website.I am wondering if we (Bozeman Sunrise Rotary) will need to go through similar process (amending growth policy) to add a second park access and re-arranging some property boundaries to get the road around the southeast side of the pond? Thanks again for your comments. Chris S From:Doug Chandler [mailto:doug@alliedengineering.com]Sent:Friday, March 18, 2016 10:09 AMTo:Chris SaundersCc:Mike Balch; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'; Ted Campbell (bozemanokie@gmail.com); William H. Anderson (E-mail)Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments Chris, Mike Balch sent me the City responses to the informal DRC review meeting for the proposed Bridger Vale/EGRA development plans.They all seemed in accordance with the discussions at the meeting which I thought were positive for the project.My question to Mike, which he was unsure of and now I am asking you, is could this project proceed as a PUD without an amendment to the a GPMA? I saw in the review documents where a PUD or a Master Site Plan was required for the REMU district, and the City generally favored a PUD.There was some question of which zoning district was most appropriate for the project, so is it possible that the PUD could proceed without changing the existing Park, Open Space and Recreational Lands Designation? From the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club’s (BSRC) perspective, this project was originally proposed as a TOP acquisition as a park, which was abandoned due to financial feasibility.BSRC pursued and proposed the present alternative to the land owner as feasible way to accomplish a substantial addition and entryway improvement to the EGRA, and BSRC is presently in the process of developing an updated master plan for the park.This Master Plan is important to BSRC for both planning and pursuing funding alternatives for the park.We would like the master plan and project to keep moving forward as fast as possible. In summary, with its substantial park component and history, the specific design of the development is pertinent so we agree that the PUD is appropriate.From the BSRC perspective, we think the existing Park, Open Space and 454 4 Recreational Lands designation may also be appropriate and we see no reason to delay and burden the project process with a GPMA.I have cc’d the owner and engineer for the development this email, so please let us know if you think this is a possible path and if there are any implications to the project from taking that approach they should be aware of? Sincerely, Doug Chandler Allied Engineering Services, Inc. 32 Discovery Dr., Bozeman, MT 59718 | Tel: 406.582.0221 | Fax: 406.582.5770 299 Prairie Drive, Stanley, ND 58784 | Tel: 701.628.0221 Cell:406.579.2150 |mailto:doug@alliedengineering.com|Web:www.alliedengineering.com From:Doug ChandlerSent:Wednesday, March 16, 2016 7:11 PM To:'Mike Balch'; 'Andrew Ebbighausen' Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Informal Comments It all seems in accordance with the discussions at the DRC.Do you need a GPMA if you do a PUD?I saw where a PUD or a Master Site Plan was required for the REMU district, and they recommended a PUD, but is it possible that you could do a PUD without changing the existing Park , Open Space and Recreational Lands Designation? Doug Chandler, PhD, PE President Allied Engineering Services, Inc. 32 Discovery Dr., Bozeman, MT 59718 | Tel: 406.582.0221 | Fax: 406.582.5770 299 Prairie Drive, Stanley, ND 58784 | Tel: 701.628.0221 Cell:406.579.2150 |mailto:doug@alliedengineering.com|Web:www.alliedengineering.com From:Mike Balch [mailto:mbalch@chengineers.com]Sent:Monday, March 14, 2016 11:03 AMTo:Doug Chandler; 'Andrew Ebbighausen'Subject:Bridger Vale Informal Comments Andy and Doug, Please see attached city comments from the Bridger Vale informal application.It looks like the city is in no hurry to review a GPMA.Thank you. Mike Balch, P.E. C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: 406-587-1115 Fax: 406-587-9768 mbalch@chengineers.com Providing Civil Engineering, Structural Engineering, Land Surveying, Subdivision Design, Geotechnical Engineering, Septic/Water System DesignandSoils/Concrete testing since 1994. 455 5 "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 thismessage 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. 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. 456 457 Adjoining Property Owners BRIDGER VALE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REMAINING TRACT GLR-1 OF COS 157, LOCATED IN THE SW ¼, SEC. 31, T. 1 S., R. 6 E. OF P.M.M., GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA EHRNMAN DAVID BRADLEY 213 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715-8767 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, Lot 5 VARNAI CHRISTINE 563 BEAR CROSSING RD GALLATIN GATEWAY, MT 59730-9641 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, Lot 4 PICKENS JARRED 257 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715-8767 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, Lot 3 BLACKBURN JAMES W III 279 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715-8767 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, Lot 2 DHEIN JUSTIN 291 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715-8767 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, Lot 1 M832MT LLC 301 GALLATIN PARK DR BOZEMAN, MT 59715-7909 GALLATIN PARK SUB, S36, T01 S, R05 E, BLOCK 1, Lot 14, ACRES 0.537, PLAT J-300 PLUS OPEN SPACE BACKCHECK LLC ATTN: DENNIS STEINHAUER P.O. BOX 1167 BOZEMAN, MT 59715 GALLATIN PARK SUB, S36, T01 S, R05 E, BLOCK 1, Lot 13, ACRES 0.537, PLAT J-300 PLUS OPEN SPACE OLD MARSH HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 1167 BOZEMAN, MT 59771-1167 GALLATIN PARK SUB, S36, T01 S, R05 E, BLOCK 1, Lot 12, ACRES 0.534, PLAT J-300 PLUS OPEN SPACE DOUBLE S. PROPERTIES LLC 384 GALLATIN PARK DR; STE 201 BOZEMAN, MT 59715-7928 GALLATIN PARK SUB, S36, T01 S, R05 E, BLOCK 1, Lot 11, ACRES 0.803, PLAT J-300 PLUS OPEN SPACE GALLATIN PARK OWNERS ASSOCIATION 300 N WILLSON AVE; #400 BOZEMAN, MT 59715-3551 GALLATIN PARK SUB, S36, T01 S, R05 E, ACRES 3.889, OPEN SPACES A, B, & C, PLAT J-300 SUNFISH PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION PO BOX 4480 (CONTIGUOUS) BOZEMAN, MT 59772-4480 MINOR SUB 385, S31, T01 S, R06 E, OPEN SPACE STATE OF MONTANA (CONTIGUOUS) PO BOX 200901 HELENA, MT 59620 S31, T01 S, R06 E, C.O.S. 1221, PARCEL GL1 & GL3, AND S31, T01 S, R06 E, C.O.S. 1221, TR GL2 SW4 ANNEX TO CITY OF BOZEMAN HILLMAN MELVIN L & SANDRA(CONTIGUOUS) 860 MANLEY RD BOZEMAN, MT 59715-8776 S31, T01 S, R06 E, ACRES 15.04, TRACT 3 S2NW4 LESS TR GL-3 COS 1221 G:\c&h\14\14486\Pud and Annexation\Preliminary Plat and PUD\PUD\Adjoiners Updated.doc 458 459 460 461 462 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT, FORM PP, ITEM #13 ADDITIONAL SUBDIVIISON PLAT SUPPLEMENTS A. SURFACE WATER Existing surface water features on Tract GLR-1 include a ditch known as the Glen Lake Drainage Ditch which borders the west boundary of the site and flows north to the East Gallatin River. This ditch drains Glen Lake which is located to the south of the subject property. There will be no disturbance to Glen Lake during construction. Figure 1 – Unnamed Ditch Vaughn Environmental Services completed a wetland delineation within the property boundaries on September 16, 2016. One wetland was identified along the western edge of the property at the location of the existing borrow ditch. The Wetland Delineation Report will be submitted to the USACE and the City of Bozeman as supporting documentation for the 310/404 joint permit. The full report is included in Appendix A of this submittal. During construction of Bridger Vale Drive a portion of the wetlands will be disturbed for the roadway construction as well as to install a RCP arch culvert under the roadway. The new culvert will replace and existing one and will convey the unnamed ditch shown in Figure 1. The existing 30” CMP culvert will be replaced by a new 22 ½” and 36 ¼” RCP Arch culvert. All necessary wetland permits for disturbances will be obtained prior to any construction. In addition to the roadway construction, water and sewer mains extensions will be installed down the length of Bridger Vale Drive. 463 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT C. GROUNDWATER Six test pits were dug on the site in the approximate location of the future buildings footprints. The test pits were dug on October 10, 2016 and the logs were prepared by Tetra Tech. The full report is included in in section 11 of this submittal. Andy Ebbighausen excavated the test pits. The test pits were excavated to an approximate depth of 5 feet below ground surface (bgs). Groundwater was observed in Test Pit #1 (TP#1) at 5.8 feet bgs. High and low seasonal groundwater levels are shown in the Water Features section of the NRCS soil report attached in this section. 464 Water Features This table gives estimates of various soil water features. The estimates are used in land use planning that involves engineering considerations. Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The four hydrologic soil groups are: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Surface runoff refers to the loss of water from an area by flow over the land surface. Surface runoff classes are based on slope, climate, and vegetative cover. The concept indicates relative runoff for very specific conditions. It is assumed that the surface of the soil is bare and that the retention of surface water resulting from irregularities in the ground surface is minimal. The classes are negligible, very low, low, medium, high, and very high. The months in the table indicate the portion of the year in which a water table, ponding, and/or flooding is most likely to be a concern. Water Features---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 5 465 Water table refers to a saturated zone in the soil. The water features table indicates, by month, depth to the top ( upper limit ) and base ( lower limit ) of the saturated zone in most years. Estimates of the upper and lower limits are based mainly on observations of the water table at selected sites and on evidence of a saturated zone, namely grayish colors or mottles (redoximorphic features) in the soil. A saturated zone that lasts for less than a month is not considered a water table. The kind of water table, apparent or perched, is given if a seasonal high water table exists in the soil. A water table is perched if free water is restricted from moving downward in the soil by a restrictive feature, in most cases a hardpan; there is a dry layer of soil underneath a wet layer. A water table is apparent if free water is present in all horizons from its upper boundary to below 2 meters or to the depth of observation. The water table kind listed is for the first major component in the map unit. Ponding is standing water in a closed depression. Unless a drainage system is installed, the water is removed only by percolation, transpiration, or evaporation. The table indicates surface water depth and the duration and frequency of ponding. Duration is expressed as very brief if less than 2 days, brief if 2 to 7 days, long if 7 to 30 days, and very long if more than 30 days. Frequency is expressed as none, rare, occasional, and frequent. None means that ponding is not probable; rare that it is unlikely but possible under unusual weather conditions (the chance of ponding is nearly 0 percent to 5 percent in any year); occasional that it occurs, on the average, once or less in 2 years (the chance of ponding is 5 to 50 percent in any year); and frequent that it occurs, on the average, more than once in 2 years (the chance of ponding is more than 50 percent in any year). Flooding is the temporary inundation of an area caused by overflowing streams, by runoff from adjacent slopes, or by tides. Water standing for short periods after rainfall or snowmelt is not considered flooding, and water standing in swamps and marshes is considered ponding rather than flooding. Duration and frequency are estimated. Duration is expressed as extremely brief if 0.1 hour to 4 hours, very brief if 4 hours to 2 days, brief if 2 to 7 days, long if 7 to 30 days, and very long if more than 30 days. Frequency is expressed as none, very rare, rare, occasional, frequent, and very frequent. None means that flooding is not probable; very rare that it is very unlikely but possible under extremely unusual weather conditions (the chance of flooding is less than 1 percent in any year); rare that it is unlikely but possible under unusual weather conditions (the chance of flooding is 1 to 5 percent in any year); occasional that it occurs infrequently under normal weather conditions (the chance of flooding is 5 to 50 percent in any year); frequent that it is likely to occur often under normal weather conditions (the chance of flooding is more than 50 percent in any year but is less than 50 percent in all months in any year); and very frequent that it is likely to occur very often under normal weather conditions (the chance of flooding is more than 50 percent in all months of any year). The information is based on evidence in the soil profile, namely thin strata of gravel, sand, silt, or clay deposited by floodwater; irregular decrease in organic matter content with increasing depth; and little or no horizon development. Water Features---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 5 466 Also considered are local information about the extent and levels of flooding and the relation of each soil on the landscape to historic floods. Information on the extent of flooding based on soil data is less specific than that provided by detailed engineering surveys that delineate flood-prone areas at specific flood frequency levels. Water Features---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 5 467 Report—Water Features Map unit symbol and soil name Hydrologic group Surface runoff Month Water table Ponding Flooding Upper limit Lower limit Kind Surface depth Duration Frequency Duration Frequency Ft Ft Ft 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner B Jan-Apr —————None —None May-Aug 4.0-8.0 6.0 Apparent ——None —None Sep-Dec —————None —None 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar C Jan-Mar —————None Brief (2 to 7 days) Rare Apr-Jul 2.0-3.5 6.0 Apparent ——None Brief (2 to 7 days) Rare Aug-Dec —————None — 556A—Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Bonebasin B/D Jan-Dec 0.0-1.0 6.0 Apparent ——None Brief (2 to 7 days) — Rare Threeriv C/D Jan-Mar —————None Brief (2 to 7 days) Rare Apr-Jun 0.0-1.0 6.0 Apparent ——None Brief (2 to 7 days) Rare Jul-Dec —————None — SLF—Sanitary landfill Sanitary landfill ——————— Water Features---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 5 468 Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff This table gives estimates of various soil water features. The estimates are used in land use planning that involves engineering considerations. Hydrologic soil groups are based on estimates of runoff potential. Soils are assigned to one of four groups according to the rate of water infiltration when the soils are not protected by vegetation, are thoroughly wet, and receive precipitation from long-duration storms. The four hydrologic soil groups are: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. If a soil is assigned to a dual hydrologic group (A/D, B/D, or C/D), the first letter is for drained areas and the second is for undrained areas. Surface runoff refers to the loss of water from an area by flow over the land surface. Surface runoff classes are based on slope, climate, and vegetative cover. The concept indicates relative runoff for very specific conditions. It is assumed that the surface of the soil is bare and that the retention of surface water resulting from irregularities in the ground surface is minimal. The classes are negligible, very low, low, medium, high, and very high. Report—Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The dash indicates no documented presence. Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Surface Runoff Hydrologic Soil Group 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner 85 —B Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 2 469 Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Surface Runoff Hydrologic Soil Group 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar 85 —C 556A—Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Bonebasin 45 —B/D Threeriv 45 —C/D SLF—Sanitary landfill Sanitary landfill 100 —— Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Hydrologic Soil Group and Surface Runoff---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 2 470 Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Water Features---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 5 of 5 471 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT D. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SLOPE The site is a majority loam with slopes ranging from 0-4%. There are no hazardous features associated with this soil type, however it is recommended that a geotechnical engineer certify any foundation design prior to construction. Additionally, due to high groundwater levels in the area it is advised against constructing buildings with full or partial basements without consulting a professional engineer. There are two small areas of the lot that are classified as sanitary landfill. Soil analysis confirms that the levels of 71 constituent chemical where below the minimum detection level. In an effort to eliminate the remaining environmental concerns, sub- slab vapor mitigation systems will be required on all lots. The NRCS soils report for the lot is attached in this section and the soils analysis is discussed further in sections 11 and 12 of this submittal. 472 Physical Soil Properties This table shows estimates of some physical characteristics and features that affect soil behavior. These estimates are given for the layers of each soil in the survey area. The estimates are based on field observations and on test data for these and similar soils. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Particle size is the effective diameter of a soil particle as measured by sedimentation, sieving, or micrometric methods. Particle sizes are expressed as classes with specific effective diameter class limits. The broad classes are sand, silt, and clay, ranging from the larger to the smaller. Sand as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.05 millimeter to 2 millimeters in diameter. In this table, the estimated sand content of each soil layer is given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. Silt as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are 0.002 to 0.05 millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated silt content of each soil layer is given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. Clay as a soil separate consists of mineral soil particles that are less than 0.002 millimeter in diameter. In this table, the estimated clay content of each soil layer is given as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. The content of sand, silt, and clay affects the physical behavior of a soil. Particle size is important for engineering and agronomic interpretations, for determination of soil hydrologic qualities, and for soil classification. The amount and kind of clay affect the fertility and physical condition of the soil and the ability of the soil to adsorb cations and to retain moisture. They influence shrink-swell potential, saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat), plasticity, the ease of soil dispersion, and other soil properties. The amount and kind of clay in a soil also affect tillage and earthmoving operations. Moist bulk density is the weight of soil (ovendry) per unit volume. Volume is measured when the soil is at field moisture capacity, that is, the moisture content at 1/3- or 1/10-bar (33kPa or 10kPa) moisture tension. Weight is determined after the soil is dried at 105 degrees C. In the table, the estimated moist bulk density of each soil horizon is expressed in grams per cubic centimeter of soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. Bulk density data are used to compute linear extensibility, shrink-swell potential, available water capacity, total pore space, and other soil properties. The moist bulk density of a soil indicates the pore space available for water and roots. Depending on soil texture, a bulk density of more than 1.4 can restrict water storage and root penetration. Moist bulk density is influenced by texture, kind of clay, content of organic matter, and soil structure. Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 6 473 Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) refers to the ease with which pores in a saturated soil transmit water. The estimates in the table are expressed in terms of micrometers per second. They are based on soil characteristics observed in the field, particularly structure, porosity, and texture. Saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) is considered in the design of soil drainage systems and septic tank absorption fields. Available water capacity refers to the quantity of water that the soil is capable of storing for use by plants. The capacity for water storage is given in inches of water per inch of soil for each soil layer. The capacity varies, depending on soil properties that affect retention of water. The most important properties are the content of organic matter, soil texture, bulk density, and soil structure. Available water capacity is an important factor in the choice of plants or crops to be grown and in the design and management of irrigation systems. Available water capacity is not an estimate of the quantity of water actually available to plants at any given time. Linear extensibility refers to the change in length of an unconfined clod as moisture content is decreased from a moist to a dry state. It is an expression of the volume change between the water content of the clod at 1/3- or 1/10-bar tension (33kPa or 10kPa tension) and oven dryness. The volume change is reported in the table as percent change for the whole soil. The amount and type of clay minerals in the soil influence volume change. Linear extensibility is used to determine the shrink-swell potential of soils. The shrink-swell potential is low if the soil has a linear extensibility of less than 3 percent; moderate if 3 to 6 percent; high if 6 to 9 percent; and very high if more than 9 percent. If the linear extensibility is more than 3, shrinking and swelling can cause damage to buildings, roads, and other structures and to plant roots. Special design commonly is needed. Organic matter is the plant and animal residue in the soil at various stages of decomposition. In this table, the estimated content of organic matter is expressed as a percentage, by weight, of the soil material that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. The content of organic matter in a soil can be maintained by returning crop residue to the soil. Organic matter has a positive effect on available water capacity, water infiltration, soil organism activity, and tilth. It is a source of nitrogen and other nutrients for crops and soil organisms. Erosion factors are shown in the table as the K factor (Kw and Kf) and the T factor. Erosion factor K indicates the susceptibility of a soil to sheet and rill erosion by water. Factor K is one of six factors used in the Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) and the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) to predict the average annual rate of soil loss by sheet and rill erosion in tons per acre per year. The estimates are based primarily on percentage of silt, sand, and organic matter and on soil structure and Ksat. Values of K range from 0.02 to 0.69. Other factors being equal, the higher the value, the more susceptible the soil is to sheet and rill erosion by water. Erosion factor Kw indicates the erodibility of the whole soil. The estimates are modified by the presence of rock fragments. Erosion factor Kf indicates the erodibility of the fine-earth fraction, or the material less than 2 millimeters in size. Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 6 474 Erosion factor T is an estimate of the maximum average annual rate of soil erosion by wind and/or water that can occur without affecting crop productivity over a sustained period. The rate is in tons per acre per year. Wind erodibility groups are made up of soils that have similar properties affecting their susceptibility to wind erosion in cultivated areas. The soils assigned to group 1 are the most susceptible to wind erosion, and those assigned to group 8 are the least susceptible. The groups are described in the "National Soil Survey Handbook." Wind erodibility index is a numerical value indicating the susceptibility of soil to wind erosion, or the tons per acre per year that can be expected to be lost to wind erosion. There is a close correlation between wind erosion and the texture of the surface layer, the size and durability of surface clods, rock fragments, organic matter, and a calcareous reaction. Soil moisture and frozen soil layers also influence wind erosion. Reference: United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. (http://soils.usda.gov) Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 6 475 Report—Physical Soil Properties Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Physical Soil Properties–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map symbol and soil name Depth Sand Silt Clay Moist bulk density Saturated hydraulic conductivity Available water capacity Linear extensibility Organic matter Erosion factors Wind erodibility group Wind erodibility indexKwKfT In Pct Pct Pct g/cc micro m/sec In/In Pct Pct 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner 0-6 -42--37-15-21- 27 1.10-1.20 -1.30 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.15-0.17-0. 19 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 2.0- 3.0- 4.0 .24 .24 3 6 48 6-12 -34--37-25-30- 35 1.30-1.40 -1.50 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.12-0.15-0. 18 3.0- 4.5- 5.9 0.5- 1.3- 2.0 .28 .28 12-26 -34--38-18-28- 35 1.35-1.43 -1.50 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.12-0.15-0. 18 3.0- 4.5- 5.9 0.0- 0.3- 0.5 .32 .32 26-60 -81--17-0- 3- 5 1.35-1.43 -1.50 42.00-92.00-14 1.00 0.01-0.04-0. 06 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 0.0- 0.3- 0.5 .05 .15 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar 0-22 -40--38-18-23- 27 1.15-1.25 -1.35 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.16-0.18-0. 20 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 3.0- 4.0- 5.0 .28 .28 4 6 48 22-49 -66--15-18-19- 27 1.35-1.45 -1.55 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.14-0.16-0. 18 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 0.5- 0.8- 1.0 .20 .20 49-60 -84-- 4-5-12- 18 1.50-1.60 -1.70 14.00-28.00-42. 00 0.04-0.05-0. 05 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 0.0- 0.0- 0.0 .02 .02 Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 6 476 Physical Soil Properties–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map symbol and soil name Depth Sand Silt Clay Moist bulk density Saturated hydraulic conductivity Available water capacity Linear extensibility Organic matter Erosion factors Wind erodibility group Wind erodibility indexKwKfT In Pct Pct Pct g/cc micro m/sec In/In Pct Pct 556A— Threeriv- Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Bonebasin 0-4 -42--37-15-21- 27 0.10-0.20 -0.30 4.00-28.00-42.0 0 0.30-0.45-0. 60 —30.0-40.0 -55.0 3 4L 86 4-15 -42--37-15-21- 27 1.10-1.20 -1.30 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.18-0.20-0. 22 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 4.0- 6.0- 8.0 .28 .28 15-25 -18--55-18-27- 35 1.25-1.35 -1.45 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.17-0.19-0. 20 3.0- 4.5- 5.9 2.0- 3.0- 4.0 .37 .37 25-60 -91-- 4-0- 5- 10 1.50-1.60 -1.70 42.00-92.00-14 1.00 0.04-0.05-0. 06 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 1.0- 1.5- 2.0 .02 .02 Threeriv 0-4 -40--38-18-23- 27 0.10-0.20 -0.30 4.00-28.00-42.0 0 0.30-0.45-0. 60 —55.0-70.0 -90.0 3 4L 86 4-9 -40--38-18-23- 27 1.15-1.25 -1.35 4.00-9.00-14.00 0.15-0.17-0. 18 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 2.0- 3.0- 4.0 .32 .32 9-29 -60--14-18-27- 35 1.25-1.35 -1.45 1.40-2.70-4.00 0.14-0.16-0. 18 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 1.0- 2.0- 3.0 .20 .20 29-60 -79--17-0- 5- 10 1.50-1.60 -1.70 42.00-92.00-14 1.00 0.02-0.04-0. 05 0.0- 1.5- 2.9 0.0- 0.5- 1.0 .02 .15 SLF—Sanitary landfill Sanitary landfill ————————— Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 5 of 6 477 Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Physical Soil Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 6 of 6 478 Engineering Properties This table gives the engineering classifications and the range of engineering properties for the layers of each soil in the survey area. Hydrologic soil group is a group of soils having similar runoff potential under similar storm and cover conditions. The criteria for determining Hydrologic soil group is found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx? content=17757.wba). Listing HSGs by soil map unit component and not by soil series is a new concept for the engineers. Past engineering references contained lists of HSGs by soil series. Soil series are continually being defined and redefined, and the list of soil series names changes so frequently as to make the task of maintaining a single national list virtually impossible. Therefore, the criteria is now used to calculate the HSG using the component soil properties and no such national series lists will be maintained. All such references are obsolete and their use should be discontinued. Soil properties that influence runoff potential are those that influence the minimum rate of infiltration for a bare soil after prolonged wetting and when not frozen. These properties are depth to a seasonal high water table, saturated hydraulic conductivity after prolonged wetting, and depth to a layer with a very slow water transmission rate. Changes in soil properties caused by land management or climate changes also cause the hydrologic soil group to change. The influence of ground cover is treated independently. There are four hydrologic soil groups, A, B, C, and D, and three dual groups, A/D, B/D, and C/D. In the dual groups, the first letter is for drained areas and the second letter is for undrained areas. The four hydrologic soil groups are described in the following paragraphs: Group A. Soils having a high infiltration rate (low runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist mainly of deep, well drained to excessively drained sands or gravelly sands. These soils have a high rate of water transmission. Group B. Soils having a moderate infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of moderately deep or deep, moderately well drained or well drained soils that have moderately fine texture to moderately coarse texture. These soils have a moderate rate of water transmission. Group C. Soils having a slow infiltration rate when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of soils having a layer that impedes the downward movement of water or soils of moderately fine texture or fine texture. These soils have a slow rate of water transmission. Group D. Soils having a very slow infiltration rate (high runoff potential) when thoroughly wet. These consist chiefly of clays that have a high shrink-swell potential, soils that have a high water table, soils that have a claypan or clay layer at or near the surface, and soils that are shallow over nearly impervious material. These soils have a very slow rate of water transmission. Depth to the upper and lower boundaries of each layer is indicated. Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 7 479 Texture is given in the standard terms used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These terms are defined according to percentages of sand, silt, and clay in the fraction of the soil that is less than 2 millimeters in diameter. "Loam," for example, is soil that is 7 to 27 percent clay, 28 to 50 percent silt, and less than 52 percent sand. If the content of particles coarser than sand is 15 percent or more, an appropriate modifier is added, for example, "gravelly." Classification of the soils is determined according to the Unified soil classification system (ASTM, 2005) and the system adopted by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO, 2004). The Unified system classifies soils according to properties that affect their use as construction material. Soils are classified according to particle-size distribution of the fraction less than 3 inches in diameter and according to plasticity index, liquid limit, and organic matter content. Sandy and gravelly soils are identified as GW, GP, GM, GC, SW, SP, SM, and SC; silty and clayey soils as ML, CL, OL, MH, CH, and OH; and highly organic soils as PT. Soils exhibiting engineering properties of two groups can have a dual classification, for example, CL-ML. The AASHTO system classifies soils according to those properties that affect roadway construction and maintenance. In this system, the fraction of a mineral soil that is less than 3 inches in diameter is classified in one of seven groups from A-1 through A-7 on the basis of particle-size distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity index. Soils in group A-1 are coarse grained and low in content of fines (silt and clay). At the other extreme, soils in group A-7 are fine grained. Highly organic soils are classified in group A-8 on the basis of visual inspection. If laboratory data are available, the A-1, A-2, and A-7 groups are further classified as A-1-a, A-1-b, A-2-4, A-2-5, A-2-6, A-2-7, A-7-5, or A-7-6. As an additional refinement, the suitability of a soil as subgrade material can be indicated by a group index number. Group index numbers range from 0 for the best subgrade material to 20 or higher for the poorest. Percentage of rock fragments larger than 10 inches in diameter and 3 to 10 inches in diameter are indicated as a percentage of the total soil on a dry-weight basis. The percentages are estimates determined mainly by converting volume percentage in the field to weight percentage. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Percentage (of soil particles) passing designated sieves is the percentage of the soil fraction less than 3 inches in diameter based on an ovendry weight. The sieves, numbers 4, 10, 40, and 200 (USA Standard Series), have openings of 4.76, 2.00, 0.420, and 0.074 millimeters, respectively. Estimates are based on laboratory tests of soils sampled in the survey area and in nearby areas and on estimates made in the field. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Liquid limit and plasticity index (Atterberg limits) indicate the plasticity characteristics of a soil. The estimates are based on test data from the survey area or from nearby areas and on field examination. Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). References: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 7 480 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 7 481 Report—Engineering Properties Absence of an entry indicates that the data were not estimated. The asterisk '*' denotes the representative texture; other possible textures follow the dash. The criteria for determining the hydrologic soil group for individual soil components is found in the National Engineering Handbook, Chapter 7 issued May 2007(http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/ OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17757.wba). Three values are provided to identify the expected Low (L), Representative Value (R), and High (H). Engineering Properties–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y indexUnifiedAASHTO>10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner 85 B 0-6 Loam CL-ML A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 5- 10 80-90-1 00 75-88-1 00 65-80- 95 50-63- 75 25-28 -30 5-8 -10 6-12 Clay loam, silty clay loam, gravelly loam CL, GC, SC A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 5- 10 65-83-1 00 60-80-1 00 55-73- 90 35-53- 70 30-35 -40 10-15-2 0 12-26 Loam, clay loam, gravelly loam CL, GC, SC A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 5- 10 65-83-1 00 60-80-1 00 55-75- 95 40-58- 75 30-35 -40 10-13-1 5 26-60 Extremely gravelly sand, very gravelly loamy sand, very gravelly sand GM, GP, GP-GM A-1 0- 0- 0 10-20- 30 25-43- 60 15-33- 50 10-23- 35 0- 8- 15 0-7 -14 NP Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 7 482 Engineering Properties–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y indexUnifiedAASHTO>10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar 85 C 0-22 Loam CL-ML A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 80-90-1 00 75-88-1 00 60-73- 85 50-63- 75 20-25 -30 5-8 -10 22-49 Loam, sandy loam CL-ML, ML A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 80-90-1 00 75-88-1 00 60-73- 85 50-63- 75 20-25 -30 NP-5 -10 49-60 Very gravelly sandy loam, very gravelly loamy sand, extremely gravelly sandy loam GM, GP- GM A-1, A-2 0- 0- 0 0- 5- 10 25-43- 60 15-33- 50 10-25- 40 5-18- 30 15-20 -25 NP-3 -5 Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 5 of 7 483 Engineering Properties–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Pct. of map unit Hydrolo gic group Depth USDA texture Classification Pct Fragments Percentage passing sieve number—Liquid limit Plasticit y indexUnifiedAASHTO>10 inches 3-10 inches 4 10 40 200 In L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H L-R-H 556A—Threeriv- Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Bonebasin 45 B/D 0-4 Muck PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 75-85- 95 55-65- 75 —— 4-15 Loam CL-ML A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 75-85- 95 55-65- 75 25-28 -30 5-8 -10 15-25 Stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam CL, CL- ML, SC, SC-SM A-2, A-4, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 60-75- 90 30-50- 70 25-30 -35 5-10-15 25-60 Very cobbly loamy coarse sand, very gravelly coarse sand, extremely cobbly loamy sand GM, GP- GM, SM, SP-SM A-1 0- 0- 0 10-28- 45 25-43- 60 20-38- 55 10-25- 40 5-10- 15 20-23 -25 NP-3 -5 Threeriv 45 C/D 0-4 Moderately decomposed plant material PT A-8 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 100-100 -100 100-100 -100 75-85- 95 55-65- 75 —— 4-9 Loam CL-ML A-4 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 95-98-1 00 90-95-1 00 75-85- 95 55-65- 75 25-28 -30 5-8 -10 9-29 Stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam CL, CL- ML, SC, SC-SM A-4, A-6 0- 0- 0 0- 0- 0 90-95-1 00 85-93-1 00 60-78- 95 35-53- 70 25-30 -35 5-10-15 29-60 Extremely gravelly loamy sand, very cobbly loamy coarse sand, very gravelly sand GM, GP- GM A-1 0- 0- 0 15-25- 35 35-48- 60 25-40- 55 20-30- 40 5-10- 15 15-18 -20 NP-3 -5 Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 6 of 7 484 Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Engineering Properties---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 7 of 7 485 Map Unit Description The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions in this report, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 7 486 Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. All the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of a given series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha-Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha-Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. Additional information about the map units described in this report is available in other soil reports, which give properties of the soils and the limitations, capabilities, and potentials for many uses. Also, the narratives that accompany the soil reports define some of the properties included in the map unit descriptions. Report—Map Unit Description Gallatin County Area, Montana 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56tb Elevation: 4,300 to 5,200 feet Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 7 487 Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Turner and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Turner Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: loam Bt - 6 to 12 inches: clay loam Bk - 12 to 26 inches: clay loam 2C - 26 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 48 to 96 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS355MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 7 488 Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) Hydric soil rating: No Meadowcreek Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS359MT) Hydric soil rating: No Turner Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS355MT) Hydric soil rating: No 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56vp Elevation: 4,400 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: All areas are prime farmland Map Unit Composition Enbar and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Enbar Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 22 inches: loam Cg - 22 to 49 inches: sandy loam 2C - 49 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 7 489 Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 24 to 42 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 10 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to very slightly saline (0.0 to 2.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 8.8 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3w Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3w Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS359MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Nythar Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Straw Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS355MT) Hydric soil rating: No 556A—Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56x4 Elevation: 4,000 to 6,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Farmland classification: Not prime farmland Map Unit Composition Threeriv and similar soils: 45 percent Bonebasin and similar soils: 45 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 5 of 7 490 Description of Threeriv Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Oe - 0 to 4 inches: moderately decomposed plant material Ag - 4 to 9 inches: loam Cg - 9 to 29 inches: stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam 2Cg - 29 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: C/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Description of Bonebasin Setting Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile Oa - 0 to 4 inches: muck A - 4 to 15 inches: loam Cg - 15 to 25 inches: stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam 2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly coarse sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 2 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 6 of 7 491 Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to high (0.57 to 1.98 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Frequency of flooding: Rare Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 15 percent Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Moderate (about 7.6 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 5w Hydrologic Soil Group: B/D Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Minor Components Threeriv Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Flood plains Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: No Blossberg Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Marshes Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes SLF—Sanitary landfill Map Unit Composition Sanitary landfill: 100 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Map Unit Description---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 7 of 7 492 Soil Map—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 3506139050614205061450506148050615105061540506139050614205061450506148050615105061540496780496810496840496870496900496930496960496990497020497050497080 496780 496810 496840 496870 496900 496930 496960 496990 497020 497050 497080 45° 42' 27'' N 111° 2' 29'' W45° 42' 27'' N111° 2' 14'' W45° 42' 21'' N 111° 2' 29'' W45° 42' 21'' N 111° 2' 14'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 40 80 160 240 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:882 if printed on B landscape (17" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 493 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 28, 2011—Aug 10, 2011 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 3494 Map Unit Legend Gallatin County Area, Montana (MT622) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 457A Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 0.1 1.3% 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 0.2 3.0% 556A Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes 6.0 92.8% SLF Sanitary landfill 0.2 2.9% Totals for Area of Interest 6.5 100.0% Soil Map—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 3 495 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT E. VEGETATION A majority of the site is designated rangeland from the NRCS websoil survey. The attached report outlines the distribution of the major vegetation. The proposed grading will remain relatively flat; therefor there are no plant species susceptible to water or wind erosion. Limiting the number of plant species ensures the survival of the native vegetation as outlined in the NRCS soil report. It is proposed with the landscape plan for the subdivision to maintain native grasses where possible. Using the existing vegetation will control undesirable, encourage natural water conservation, and minimize erosion risks. 496 All Ecological Sites -- Rangeland—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 3506139050614205061450506148050615105061540506139050614205061450506148050615105061540496780496810496840496870496900496930496960496990497020497050497080 496780 496810 496840 496870 496900 496930 496960 496990 497020 497050 497080 45° 42' 27'' N 111° 2' 29'' W45° 42' 27'' N111° 2' 14'' W45° 42' 21'' N 111° 2' 29'' W45° 42' 21'' N 111° 2' 14'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 40 80 160 240 Feet 0 10 20 40 60 Meters Map Scale: 1:882 if printed on B landscape (17" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 497 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Rating Polygons R044XS355MT R044XS359MT R044XS365MT Not rated or not available Soil Rating Lines R044XS355MT R044XS359MT R044XS365MT Not rated or not available Soil Rating Points R044XS355MT R044XS359MT R044XS365MT Not rated or not available Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 28, 2011—Aug 10, 2011 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. All Ecological Sites -- Rangeland—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 3498 All Ecological Sites — Rangeland Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol Map unit name Component name (percent) Ecological site Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 457A Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner (85%)R044XS355MT — Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. 0.1 1.3% Beaverton (5%)R044XS354MT — Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. Meadowcreek (5%)R044XS359MT — Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. Turner (5%)R044XS355MT — Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. 509B Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar (85%)R044XS359MT — Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. 0.2 3.0% Nythar (10%)R044XS365MT — Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Straw (5%)R044XS355MT — Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. 556A Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Bonebasin (45%)R044XS365MT — Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. 6.0 92.8% Threeriv (45%)R044XS365MT — Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Blossberg (5%)R044XS365MT — Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. Threeriv (5%)R044XS365MT — Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. SLF Sanitary landfill Sanitary landfill (100%) 0.2 2.9% Totals for Area of Interest 6.5 100.0% All Ecological Sites -- Rangeland—Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 3 499 Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report Assessing sagebrush ecosystem resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive annual grasses helps land managers understand key drivers of ecosystem change, identify relative risks of crossing thresholds to undesired states, and design appropriate management actions to promote desired successional trajectories. Field guides have been developed for the Great Basin to help practitioners evaluate relative resilience and resistance of a site and ask the right questions when evaluating management options (Miller et al. 2014). Key factors that can be used to ‘score’ a site’s relative resilience and resistance include various soil and climate characteristics, current or potential vegetation, and wildfire severity or treatment impacts. This report contains pertinent soil survey information related to the factors in the Score Sheet for Rating Resilience to Disturbance and Resistance to Invasive Annual Grasses in the Great Basin (Miller et al. 2014, 2015). This information is intended to be used as part of the initial background data gathering process prior to a site visit and should be verified onsite. Miller R.F., Chambers, J.C., Pellant, M. 2014. A field guide to selecting the most appropriate treatments in sagebrush and pinyon-juniper ecosystems in the Great Basin: Evaluating resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive annual grasses and predicting vegetation response. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-322. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr322.html Miller R.F., Chambers, J.C., Pellant, M. 2015. A field guide for rapid assessment of post-wildfire recovery potential in sagebrush and pinon-juniper ecosystems in the Great Basin: Evaluating resilience to disturbance and resistance to invasive annual grasses and predicting vegetation response. Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS- GTR-338. http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_gtr338.html Report—Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report Gallatin County Area, Montana 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Elevation: 4,300 to 5,200 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Major Land Resource Area: 44B - Central Rocky Mountain Valleys Map Unit Composition Turner and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 4 500 Description of Turner Taxonomic classification Temperature regime: Frigid Moisture regime: Moisture subclass: Typic Taxonomic class: Fine-loamy over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, superactive, frigid Typic Argiustolls Typical profile A - 0 to 6 inches: loam Bt - 6 to 12 inches: clay loam Bk - 12 to 26 inches: clay loam 2C - 26 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and interpretative groups Parent material: Alluvium Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Well drained Depth to water table: About 48 to 96 inches Ecological site: Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS355MT) Common sagebrush species: big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata), cudweed sagewort (Artemisia glomerata) 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Elevation: 4,400 to 6,000 feet Mean annual precipitation: 15 to 19 inches Mean annual air temperature: 37 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Major Land Resource Area: 44B - Central Rocky Mountain Valleys Map Unit Composition Enbar and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Description of Enbar Taxonomic classification Temperature regime: Frigid Moisture regime: Moisture subclass: Taxonomic class: Fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, frigid Cumulic Haplustolls Typical profile A - 0 to 22 inches: loam Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 4 501 Cg - 22 to 49 inches: sandy loam 2C - 49 to 60 inches: very gravelly loamy sand Properties and interpretative groups Parent material: Loamy alluvium Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly drained Depth to water table: About 24 to 42 inches Ecological site: Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS359MT) 556A—Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting Elevation: 4,000 to 6,100 feet Mean annual precipitation: 12 to 18 inches Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 45 degrees F Frost-free period: 90 to 110 days Major Land Resource Area: 44B - Central Rocky Mountain Valleys Map Unit Composition Threeriv and similar soils: 45 percent Bonebasin and similar soils: 45 percent Minor components: 10 percent Description of Threeriv Taxonomic classification Temperature regime: Frigid Moisture regime: Aquic Moisture subclass: Typic Taxonomic class: Fine-loamy over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, superactive, calcareous, frigid Typic Fluvaquents Typical profile Oe - 0 to 4 inches: moderately decomposed plant material Ag - 4 to 9 inches: loam Cg - 9 to 29 inches: stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam 2Cg - 29 to 60 inches: extremely gravelly loamy sand Properties and interpretative groups Parent material: Alluvium Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 4 502 Description of Bonebasin Taxonomic classification Temperature regime: Frigid Moisture regime: Aquic Moisture subclass: Taxonomic class: Fine-loamy over sandy or sandy-skeletal, mixed, superactive, frigid Fluvaquentic Endoaquolls Typical profile Oa - 0 to 4 inches: muck A - 4 to 15 inches: loam Cg - 15 to 25 inches: stratified sandy loam to silty clay loam 2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly coarse sand Properties and interpretative groups Parent material: Alluvium Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Very poorly drained Depth to water table: About 0 to 12 inches Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) SLF—Sanitary landfill Map Unit Composition Sanitary landfill: 100 percent Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Sagebrush Ecosystem Resilience and Resistance Soils Report---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 4 503 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition In areas that have similar climate and topography, differences in the kind and amount of rangeland or forest understory vegetation are closely related to the kind of soil. Effective management is based on the relationship between the soils and vegetation and water. This table shows, for each soil that supports vegetation, the ecological site, plant association, or habitat type; the total annual production of vegetation in favorable, normal, and unfavorable years; the characteristic vegetation; and the average percentage of each species. An explanation of the column headings in the table follows. An ecological site, plant association, or habitat type is the product of all the environmental factors responsible for its development. It has characteristic soils that have developed over time throughout the soil development process; a characteristic hydrology, particularly infiltration and runoff that has developed over time; and a characteristic plant community (kind and amount of vegetation). The hydrology of the site is influenced by development of the soil and plant community. The vegetation, soils, and hydrology are all interrelated. Each is influenced by the others and influences the development of the others. The plant community on an ecological site, plant association, or habitat type is typified by an association of species that differs from that of other ecological sites, plant associations, or habitat types in the kind and/or proportion of species or in total production. Descriptions of ecological sites are provided in the Field Office Technical Guide, which is available in local offices of the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). Descriptions of plant associations or habitat types are available from local U.S. Forest Service offices. Total dry-weight production is the amount of vegetation that can be expected to grow annually in a well managed area that is supporting the potential natural plant community. It includes all vegetation, whether or not it is palatable to grazing animals. It includes the current year's growth of leaves, twigs, and fruits of woody plants. It does not include the increase in stem diameter of trees and shrubs. It is expressed in pounds per acre of air-dry vegetation for favorable, normal, and unfavorable years. In a favorable year, the amount and distribution of precipitation and the temperatures make growing conditions substantially better than average. In a normal year, growing conditions are about average. In an unfavorable year, growing conditions are well below average, generally because of low available soil moisture. Yields are adjusted to a common percent of air-dry moisture content. Characteristic vegetation (the grasses, forbs, shrubs, and understory trees that make up most of the potential natural plant community on each soil) is listed by common name. Under rangeland composition and forest understory, the expected percentage of the total annual production is given for each species making up the characteristic vegetation. The percentages are by dry weight for rangeland. Percentages for forest understory are by either dry weight or canopy cover. The amount that can be used as forage depends on the kinds of grazing animals and on the grazing season. Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 1 of 7 504 Range management requires knowledge of the kinds of soil and of the potential natural plant community. It also requires an evaluation of the present range similarity index and rangeland trend. Range similarity index is determined by comparing the present plant community with the potential natural plant community on a particular rangeland ecological site. The more closely the existing community resembles the potential community, the higher the range similarity index. Rangeland trend is defined as the direction of change in an existing plant community relative to the potential natural plant community. Further information about the range similarity index and rangeland trend is available in the "National Range and Pasture Handbook," which is available in local offices of NRCS or on the Internet. The objective in range management is to control grazing so that the plants growing on a site are about the same in kind and amount as the potential natural plant community for that site. Such management generally results in the optimum production of vegetation, control of undesirable brush species, conservation of water, and control of erosion. Sometimes, however, an area with a range similarity index somewhat below the potential meets grazing needs, provides wildlife habitat, and protects soil and water resources. Reference: United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, National range and pasture handbook. Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 2 of 7 505 Report—Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Ecological Site, Plant Association, or Habitat Type Total dry-weight production Characteristic rangeland or forest understory vegetation Composition Favorable year Normal year Unfavorable year Rangeland Forest understory Forest understory Lb/ac Lb/ac Lb/ac Pct dry wt Pct dry wt Pct cover 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Turner Silty (Si) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS355MT) 2,200 1,800 1,400 bluebunch wheatgrass 30 —— Idaho fescue 15 —— Columbia needlegrass 10 —— lupine 5 —— needle and thread 5 —— other perennial forbs 5 —— rough fescue 5 —— western wheatgrass 5 —— big sagebrush 3 —— common yarrow 3 —— cudweed sagewort 2 —— other shrubs 2 —— Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 3 of 7 506 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Ecological Site, Plant Association, or Habitat Type Total dry-weight production Characteristic rangeland or forest understory vegetation Composition Favorable year Normal year Unfavorable year Rangeland Forest understory Forest understory Lb/ac Lb/ac Lb/ac Pct dry wt Pct dry wt Pct cover 509B—Enbar loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Enbar Subirrigated (Sb) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS359MT) 4,500 4,000 3,500 basin wildrye 20 —— Nebraska sedge 10 —— slimstem reedgrass 10 —— other perennial grasslikes 6 —— beaked sedge 5 —— bearded wheatgrass 5 —— northern reedgrass 5 —— slender wheatgrass 5 —— tufted hairgrass 5 —— other perennial forbs 3 —— Shrubby cinquefoil 3 —— Iris 2 —— rose 2 —— silverweed cinquefoil 2 —— buttercup 1 —— wild mint 1 —— Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 4 of 7 507 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Ecological Site, Plant Association, or Habitat Type Total dry-weight production Characteristic rangeland or forest understory vegetation Composition Favorable year Normal year Unfavorable year Rangeland Forest understory Forest understory Lb/ac Lb/ac Lb/ac Pct dry wt Pct dry wt Pct cover 556A—Threeriv-Bonebasin loams, 0 to 2 percent slopes Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 5 of 7 508 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Ecological Site, Plant Association, or Habitat Type Total dry-weight production Characteristic rangeland or forest understory vegetation Composition Favorable year Normal year Unfavorable year Rangeland Forest understory Forest understory Lb/ac Lb/ac Lb/ac Pct dry wt Pct dry wt Pct cover Bonebasin Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) 5,500 5,000 4,500 beaked sedge 15 —— slimstem reedgrass 15 —— Nebraska sedge 10 —— northern reedgrass 10 —— American sloughgrass 5 —— mannagrass 5 —— mat muhly 5 —— other perennial grasslikes 5 —— other perennial forbs 5 —— tufted hairgrass 5 —— water whorlgrass 5 —— silverweed cinquefoil 3 —— willow 3 —— redosier dogwood 2 —— Iris 1 —— wild mint 1 —— Threeriv Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) 5,500 5,000 4,500 beaked sedge 15 —— slimstem reedgrass 15 —— Nebraska sedge 10 —— northern reedgrass 10 —— American sloughgrass 5 —— mannagrass 5 —— mat muhly 5 —— other perennial grasslikes 5 —— other perennial forbs 5 —— tufted hairgrass 5 —— water whorlgrass 5 —— silverweed cinquefoil 3 —— willow 3 —— redosier dogwood 2 —— Iris 1 —— wild mint 1 —— Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 6 of 7 509 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition–Gallatin County Area, Montana Map unit symbol and soil name Ecological Site, Plant Association, or Habitat Type Total dry-weight production Characteristic rangeland or forest understory vegetation Composition Favorable year Normal year Unfavorable year Rangeland Forest understory Forest understory Lb/ac Lb/ac Lb/ac Pct dry wt Pct dry wt Pct cover SLF—Sanitary landfill Sanitary landfill ———————— Data Source Information Soil Survey Area: Gallatin County Area, Montana Survey Area Data: Version 20, Sep 19, 2016 Rangeland and Forest Vegetation Classification, Productivity, and Plant Composition---Gallatin County Area, Montana Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 5/8/2017 Page 7 of 7 510 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT F. WILDLIFE Response letters were received from Julie Cunningham, Bozeman Area Wildlife Biologist with the Montana Department of Fish Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). In her email, Julie states that the MFWP has no major concerns with the development moving forward considering its proximity to other substantial developments. I. AGRICULTURAL WATER USER FACILITIES There are no known agricultural user facilities on the site. The land is currently being used as cattle grazing land but this will cease once construction begins and the parks have been deeded over to the City of Bozeman and to the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club. There is an existing ditch on the west side of the lot that passes under the EGRA drive approach. This ditch is not an irrigation ditch but drains Glen Lake to the East Gallatin River . J. WATER AND SEWER Water for domestic use and fire protection will be provided by connections to the City of Bozeman water system. There is an existing 10” ductile iron water main running north south in Manley Road and an 8” water main stub and blowoff located in the cul-de-sac in Turtle Way. The water main for the project will be looped from turtle way to Manley Road. Please see the Water and Sewer Design Report for more information on the water main layout and water system capacity. A check for cash-in-lieu of water rights will be provided for the subdivision at final plat approval. Each lot will have a portion of the water right for the subdivision. A new sanitary sewer main extension will be required for this project. The sanitary sewer collection system in Bridger Vale will connect to the existing system at a manhole in Gallatin Park Drive. New sanitary sewer mains will be installed in Manley Road and on the north side of Bridger Vale Drive in the subdivision. Wastewater from the site will gravity flow to the west through the Gallatin Park Subdivision where it drains into two existing parallel 20” asbestos concrete interceptor mains. From here wastewater continues west to the Bozeman Wastewater Treatment Plant. See the Water and Sewer Design Report for more information on the sewer main layout and the collection system capacity K. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Stormwater will be managed through installing a bio swale in the landscaped median of Bridger Vale Drive. There will be some retention and detention in the bio swale. Stormwater from the alley and residential lots will drain to the swale through a series of curb cuts in the median curb. Drainage from the swale will end up in a detention pond on the west side of the open space. The detention pond will outlet to the ditch that flows north along the west side of the site. The ditch will be channeled under the new roadway with a new 94 linear foot 22,5” by 36.25” reinforced concrete arch pipe with flared end transitions. This culvert will replace the existing culvert to accommodate the new Bridger Vale Drive road section. Refer to the Stormwater Management and Design Report included with this submittal for further details on stormwater. 511 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT L. STREETS, ROADS AND ALLEYS The street section in the right-of-way to be constructed with Bridger Vale Subdivision P.U.D. is proposed to be a non-standard divided lane, center median section with a center grass lined median that will provide stormwater detention and two paved one way travel lanes that are twenty feet wide. Vehicle access to each of the lots will be accomplished with an alley that is proposed in the back of the lots. The existing roadway to the west is Manley Road which is a 30’ wide collector; currently there is no curbing on either side of Manley Road in the project vicinity. There are bike lanes on either side of the roadway and an asphalt pathway along the west side of the road in the boulevard. The site currently has a paved access road which is used as the entrance for the East Gallatin Recreational Area. Further analysis is discussed in detail in the traffic impact study included in section 10 of this submittal. M. UTILITIES Existing utilities consist of a cable box on the west side of the site north of the existing drive approach. There are overhead electric lines which run along the north and south boundaries of the site. There is an existing light pole fed off of the overhead electric lines located in the future commercial lot as well which will be removed during commercial lot development. There are no other known private utilities on the existing site. The email from Century Link included in section 14 of this submittal verifies that service can be provided to the subdivision. N. EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES The subject property is in the Hawthorne Elementary School District and the Chief Joseph Middle School District. The Hawthorne Elementary School is 2.7 miles from the site and the Chief Joseph Middle School is 5 miles to the site. Bozeman High School is located 2.9 miles from the site. The attached response letter outlines the anticipated increase from the development. The school system can accommodate the increase in students. O. LAND USE The current land use for the site is a drive access for the East Gallatin Recreational Area the future land use map designates this lot as parks, open space and recreational. There are fences around two areas of the existing site and a shed on the south end. It appears that the site was being used as cattle grazing land at the time of the Google street view imagery. The site is bordered on the south and east by the East Gallatin Recreational Area and Glen Lake to the south. There is a residential minor subdivision on the west half of the south border and agricultural suburban zone to the north of the site that is being used as residential. The Gallatin Park Subdivision is located across Manley Road from the project site and this development is a mixed-use development in an industrial land use designation it consists of single household residential, administrative professional, mixed use (undesignated), and commercial retail sales, services and banks. P. PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES There is an existing public use park known as the East Gallatin Recreational Area (EGRA) located to the south and east of the proposed subdivision. Part of the existing park is leased to 512 BRIDGER VALE SUBDIVISION P.U.D. PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION #14486 PP ITEM #13 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT the City of Bozeman by the Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department. The EGRA is an 83- acre park which has a pond known as Glen Lake that is fed by groundwater. There is an extensive trail network at the existing park. This project proposes to annex the 1.14 acre open space to the EGRA and ownership of the open space will be quit claim deeded to the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club who will be responsible for maintaining and improving the park following approval of the subdivision final plat. The 0.69-acre public park will be deeded to the City of Bozeman and will be handed over to the Bozeman Parks and Recreational Department and will be an extension of the EGRA with trail connections. The Master Parks Plan included in Section 6 of this submittal discusses the Parks and Recreation Facilities in more detail. R. LIGHTING PLAN A lighting plan and light specifications are included with this submittal. There is a proposed 35’ tall light pole and light to be installed in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Bridger Vale Drive and Manley Road. Refer to the lighting plan and specifications for further detail on the lighting plan. S. MISCELLANEOUS The proposed subdivision will improve the access to public lands. Currently the project serves as an access to EGRA as stated in Section Q. The proposed subdivision will improve the access road to the EGRA, additionally it will promote connectivity adjacent developments and the EGRA. Paved trails through the open space and park in the subdivision will connect the EGRA to the neighboring developments. Potential hazards in the subdivision are levels of chemicals in the groundwater vapor in the site. While not at hazardous levels volatile organic compounds in the vapor of some groundwater are above the minimum detection levels. In an effort to alleviate the risk, sub slab vapor mitigation systems are required on all proposed structures. The proposed subdivision is outside of the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Fire hydrants located within the subdivision will mitigate the risk of fire spreading past the WUI. T. AFFORDABLE HOUSING Cash-in-lieu of affordable housing is being proposed for this project. Section 38.380.140.C.2 allows for staged delivery of in‐lieu contributions. A CIL payment of $6,396.80 (1/20th of the total CIL payment) will be made prior to the certificate of occupancy being granted for each lot. Application for affordable housing in included with this submittal. 513 From:Cunningham, Julie To:Matt Hausauer; Moser, David Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Subdivision Date:Friday, May 5, 2017 9:43:44 AM Attachments:image001.png Due to its proximity to other substantial development, I have no major wildlife concerns on this proposed subdivision. Julie Cunningham Bozeman Area Wildlife Biologist Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks 1400 S. 19th Ave Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 994-6341 (406) 994-4090 (fax) From: Matt Hausauer [mailto:mhausauer@chengineers.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 10:09 AM To: Cunningham, Julie <juliecunningham@mt.gov>; Moser, David <davemoser@mt.gov> Subject: Bridger Vale Subdivision Hi Julie and Dave, We are submitting the preliminary plat application for the proposed Bridger Vale Subdivision just north of the East Gallatin Recreation Area tomorrow and I just realized I have not received a response from FWP. Could you please review and provide any comments you may have on this proposed subdivision. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Matt Hausauer, P.E. Civil Engineer www.chengineers.com "This message and/or attachment contains confidential information.Distribution of this information must be only to those of C&H Engineering andSurveying, Inc employees or individuals contractually approved to receive thisinformation. If you are not the addressee and/or are not authorized toreceive this for the addressee, you must not use, copy, disclose,forward, 514 1 Adam Morse From:Moser, David <davemoser@mt.gov> Sent:Tuesday, May 02, 2017 11:06 AM To:Matt Hausauer; Cunningham, Julie Subject:RE: Bridger Vale Subdivision Matt, Our principal concerns for impacts to fish and aquatic ecosystems at this time are generic to this type of development and its potential to harm local waterways.In general you should plan to avoid any activity (road building and associated infrastructure, house construction, utility placement) near surface waters that might destabilize existing channel configurations.You will want to avoid disturbing riparian or wetland vegetation. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has developed recommended standards for development near water bodies.For rivers we recommend 250 feet of vegetated buffer and an additional 50 ft of building setback.For perennial streams we recommend 150 feet of vegetated buffer plus 50 additional feet of building setback.For any other water body we recommend 100 feet of vegetated buffer and 30 feet of additional building setback (Fish and Wildlife Recommendations for Subdivision Development in Montana 2012) Additionally, you will want to avoid situations that might deliver pollutants to surface waters as can happen for example when paved surfaces concentrate oil or other petroleum products that can be washed into channels by rain or snowmelt.Drainage within the subdivision is a critical consideration to avoid increasing sediment or other contaminants that might be delivered to local waterways. Our other main concern is to prevent localized stream disturbances during construction.We anticipate that your construction plans will include actions to reduce or mitigate sediment delivery, and to prevent discharges of petroleum products or other harmful substances into nearby ditches, or to lands capable of delivering these substances to nearby waterways.An important project goal should be to ensure that the completed subdivision poses no direct or persistent environmental threat to the local watershed. ************************* David Moser, Fisheries Biologist Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks -Region 3 1400 S.19th Ave. Bozeman, MT 59718 406-994-6938 davemoser@mt.gov ************************* From:Matt Hausauer [mailto:mhausauer@chengineers.com] Sent:Tuesday, May 02, 2017 10:09 AM To:Cunningham, Julie <juliecunningham@mt.gov>; Moser, David <davemoser@mt.gov> Subject:Bridger Vale Subdivision Hi Julie and Dave, We are submitting the preliminary plat application for the proposed Bridger Vale Subdivision just north of the East Gallatin Recreation Area tomorrow and I just realized I have not received a response from FWP. Could you please review and provide any comments you may have on this proposed subdivision. Please let me know if you have any questions. 515 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ December 13, 2016 Matt Hausauer C&H Engineering and Surveying Inc. 1091 Stoneidge Drive Bozeman, Montana 59718 Via email: mhausauer@chengineers.com Subject: Proposed Bridger Vale Subdivision, Remaining Tract GLR-1, COS 157, Bozeman, MT (14486) Dear Mr. Hausauer, Referencing your letter received December 5, 2016 concerning the evaluation of the subject development. Bozeman Public Schools would expect that the 20 residential townhouse lots planned for this development would generate the following students: ♦ Pre-K to 5th 5 Student ♦ 6th to 8th 2 Students ♦ 9th to 12th 3 Student As of this date, the proposed development will be in the Hawthorne Elementary School, Chief Joseph Middle School and Bozeman High School attendance areas. Population growth and demographic shifts in the future may necessitate boundary realignments to existing schools, which could modify the designated attending schools. Similarly, if a designated school attendance area’s student population exceeds the school’s capacity, attendance at an alternate school may be required. Infrastructure, such as sidewalks, should be constructed for the entire project irrespective of when actual homes are developed to provide a Safe Route to School pathway for students to safely traverse the developed and existing roadways. Our existing bus system can accommodate the estimated number of additional students. Please let us know if there are any changes to the proposed development as this could modify the above student projections. Sincerely, Todd Swinehart, PE cc: Steve Johnson, Deputy Superintendent of Operations – Bozeman Public Schools Vance Ruff, Transportation Coordinator – Bozeman Public Schools Todd Swinehart, PE Director of Facilities (406) 522-6009 todd.swinehart@bsd7.org Bozeman Public Schools 404 West Main, PO Box 520 Bozeman, MT 59771-0520 www.bsd7.org 516 517 518 519 BRIDGER VALE PUD PARK MASTER PLAN September 25, 2018 Prepared for: PO Box 930 Manhattan, Montana 59741 Prepared by: In Conjunction With: 520 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 i CONTENTS Bridger Vale PUD .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Park Master Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Location and History ......................................................................................................................... 1 Project Scope ................................................................................................................................................ 1 Park Dedication Requirements ..................................................................................................................... 2 Dedicated Parkland ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Parkland Amenities ....................................................................................................................................... 2 Vegetation ..................................................................................................................................................... 3 Irrigation ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Soils ............................................................................................................................................................... 4 Trails .............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Maintenance .................................................................................................................................................. 4 Appendix A: Park Plan .................................................................................................................................. 7 Appendix B: Opinion of Probable Cost ......................................................................................................... 8 521 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 1 PROJECT LOCATION AND HISTORY Bridger Vale PUD is located off Manley Road, on a current access road that services the East Gallatin Recreation Area (EGRA) in Gallatin County, and adjacent to the City of Bozeman. Bridger Vale PUD proposes twenty (20) multi-family townhouse dwelling units and one (1) commercial lot. Legal description of the property is: S31, T01 S, R06 E, C.O.S. 157, REM TRACT SW4 6.472AC. The current use of the land is vacant RR – residential rural. Zoning is Gallatin County MI – light industrial. Annexation to the City of Bozeman has been approved for the property, however the land is not yet annexed. Proposed zoning in the City of Bozeman for the land will be REMU - Residential Emphasis Mixed-use District. Adjacent properties are zones City of Bozeman R-1, M-1, PLI, and Gallatin County AS. Ownership of lots include: HILLMAN MELVIN L & SANDRA L 860 MANLEY RD BOZEMAN, MT 59715- 8776 DOUBLE S PROPERTIES LLC 384 GALLATIN PARK DR STE 201 BOZEMAN, MT 59715- 7928 OLD MARSH HOLDINGS LLC PO BOX 1167 BOZEMAN, MT 59771-1167 BACKCHECK LLC MAIL TO DENNIS STEINHAUER BOZEMAN, MT 59771 DHEIN JUSTIN 291 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715- 8767 BLACKBURN JAMES W III 279 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715- 8767 PICKENS JARRED 257 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715-876 VARNAI CHRISTINE 563 BEAR CROSSING RD GALLATIN GATEWAY, MT 59730-9641 WHEELER JACOB A 213 TURTLE WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59715- 8767 SUNFISH PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC PO BOX 4480 BOZEMAN, MT 59772- 4480 There are wetlands and a few existing shrubs and trees on the site. Within the design of the Bridger Vale PUD, care has been taken to preserve as much of the existing wetlands and vegetation as possible. Historical use of the land includes agricultural uses. See the Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for further detail. PROJECT SCOPE Bridger Vale PUD Park Master Plan is comprised of the following components; dedicated park, open space, and trail network. The residential units and the park are the first phase of the development; the commercial lot and open space will be developed as separate future phases. Upon approval, the open space is planned to immediately transfer ownership to the Bozeman Sunrise Rotary Club, who will further design and develop that parcel beyond what is indicated on the construction documents. 522 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 2 The purpose of this Park Master Plan is to describe the initial level of development and maintenance of the dedicated park and trails. This park design is consistent with the goals of the city’s long-range parks plan in that this park will provide opportunities and amenities for “an active community with parks, recreation facilities and programs, trails, and open spaces that are…outstanding in quality to meet the needs of all of our citizens” (PROST Plan, 2007). The proposed park will meet the recreation needs of the residents of the development through providing passive recreation, walking trails, and connection to the EGRA. In addition, the lawn areas provide potential for active recreational activities. PARK DEDICATION REQUIREMENTS Number of Residential Units: 20 Multi-family dwelling units proposed on 6.47 acre site. Parkland Required: 20 Dwelling Units/acre x 0.03 acres/unit = 0.60 acres of parkland/acre 0.60 acres parkland required Parkland Provided: 0.69 acres 0.69 acres provided - 0.60 acres required = 0.09 acres parkland excess DEDICATED PARKLAND The Bridger Vale PUD dedicated parkland constitutes 0.69 acres of land adjoining the existing EGRA parkland and trail system to the east. The emphasis of this plan is to provide passive recreation and active trail uses by connecting to the existing EGRA trail system. Sidewalks provided throughout the Bridger Vale PUD will also connect to the existing EGRA trail system to the south. The Bridger Vale PUD parkland will be maintained as areas of drought tolerant turf grass and aspen trees to complement the adjoining EGRA parkland. The grasses will be mowed 1-2 times per week or often as deemed necessary. A permanent automatic irrigation system will be provided to all plantings. PARKLAND AMENITIES The Bridger Vale PUD parkland will provide turf grasses, trees, and trails for passive and active recreation in the dedicated parkland. Trees will be provided to offer shade and interest along the trail system. The proposed trails will connect to the existing EGRA trail system. ACCESSIBILITY All parkland amenities and trails are ADA accessible. STREET FRONTAGE Due to the location of the parkland, existing adjacencies, and the desire to connect and expand the usage of the EGRA, it is not possible to provide 100% street frontage of the park perimeter. As much street frontage as possible has been provided. 523 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 3 PARKING REQUIREMENTS No on-street parking is allowed along the alleyway street frontage for the dedicated parkland. Off-street parking is provided in the adjacent EGRA parking lots. FUTURE AMENITIES Any future amenities not indicated in this Park Master Plan will be the responsibility of the Bridger Vale Property Owners Association (POA), City of Bozeman or other future entity established to construct, and build said improvements. FINANCING Appropriate financial planning and bonding will occur as requested by the City of Bozeman. An Opinion of Probable Cost has been provided with this Park Master Plan. CONSTRUCTION All construction shall be performed in accordance with current City of Bozeman standards and the State of Montana Building and Specialty Codes. Prior to site work or planting, a pre- construction meeting(s) with the City of Bozeman shall occur and proper permits shall be obtained. The City of Bozeman must approve all plans and improvements. Any deviation from the Park Master Plan shall be submitted to the City of Bozeman prior to construction. VEGETATION All plant material shall conform to the current American Standard for Nursery Stock, by the American Nursery and Landscape Association. All plants to be nursery grown. Construction documents to specify species, quantities, and selections. TREES Tree selection is based on the current City of Bozeman Tree List and species are subject to the approval of the City of Bozeman. Parkland tree species include single and multi-stem Populus tremuloides (Quaking Aspen). GRASSES Seed mixes are indicated on the construction documents. Turf areas include drought tolerant grass seed. All disturbed areas caused by construction activities shall be seeded as indicated on the construction documents. All lawn seed shall be fresh, clean new crop seed, of local origin. IRRIGATION An automatic irrigation system to sustain the landscape plantings shall be provided, meeting City of Bozeman requirements and state building codes. See irrigation plan. Lawn areas are to be irrigated with sprinkler heads and trees to be irrigated with root zone watering system. The parkland will be irrigated by connecting City of Bozeman water service lines. Upon competition of irrigation installation, as-built drawings shall be provided to the Bridger Vale POA and the City of Bozeman Parks Department. 524 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 4 SOILS See the Phase 1 ESA for soils report regarding soil type and testing. Prior to planting, on-site topsoil shall be tested for soil fertility by a certified testing lab. If necessary, topsoil for turf grasses and tree pits shall be amended as recommended by the soil fertility report and to meet the City of Bozeman minimum requirements. All rocks larger than 1 inch in diameter shall be removed. TRAILS All trails shall meet current ADA Guidelines. Trails shall be 72” in width and match grades when connecting to existing trails. Trail detail is indicated in the construction documents. Trails shall be kept clear of weeds for a minimum period of 2 years following construction completion. Developer is responsible for trail maintenance until 50% of units are sold, thereafter, the Bridger Vale POA shall become responsible. MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBLE PARTY The developer shall be responsible for maintenance of trails, parkland, and irrigation until 50% of the dwelling units are sold. Thereafter the Bridger Vale POA shall take over maintenance. The Bridger Vale POA shall be responsible for parkland insurance, taxes (if any), and maintenance of all parkland amenities. Funds to pay for these items may be collected by the Bridger Vale POA Board, and at its discretion, may adjust the assessments as needed to meet the needs of the POA and parkland. The association shall contract annually with a licensed landscape contractor, for the landscape maintenance of the parklands and irrigation system. The POA shall be responsible for park maintenance until such a time that a City of Bozeman Park Maintenance District is created. TREES The landscape contractor shall provide annual care, trimming, pruning, of trees and replacement of dead trees. All tree trimming shall be performed by a certified arborist and in coordination with the City of Bozeman Forestry Division. TRAILS The landscape contractor shall regularly inspect trails, providing surface maintenance as needed to prevent erosion or unsafe conditions. Weeds shall be controlled on the trail surface, meeting City of Bozeman standards. TURF CARE Grasses shall be mowed 1-2 times per week, or as deemed necessary. 525 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 5 NOXIOUS WEED CONTROL A weed control program shall be created that conforms to the City of Bozeman, Gallatin County Weed Control Board, and NRCS requirements. This will include spot spraying native grass areas and trails. Work shall be done by a licensed contractor, as needed to control weeds per the weed control program. Signs shall be posted prior to application of pesticides or herbicides on the parkland. Signs shall remain in place for the minimum of two days or time period deemed necessary by the chemical manufacturer, whichever is greater. Records shall be maintained in accordance with State of Montana Pesticide Act and copies submitted to the City of Bozeman Parks Department. FERTILIZATION The goal of the Bridger Vale PUD Park Master Plan is to minimize fertilization to prevent unnecessary run-off into streams and wetlands. It is not recommended that native grasses or aspen trees be fertilized. If the ongoing growth of such plants causes concern, a licensed landscape contractor or arborist shall be consulted, and a soil test conducted to deem if fertilizer is needed and/or appropriate, before any native grasses, wildflowers, or trees are fertilized. SNOW AND LEAF REMOVAL There are no sidewalks within the parkland. If in the future, sidewalks are provided, it will be the responsibility of the Bridger Vale POA to contract with a snow removal service to plow snow from sidewalks. Sidewalks must be plowed within 24 hours of the end of a snow fall event, per City of Bozeman. The Bridger Vale POA shall be responsible for contracting with a landscaper, handyman, or other service provider to remove leaf debris from trees in the parkland each autumn. IRRIGATION SYSTEM A licensed landscape contractor or irrigation service technician shall be contracted to maintain, service, and repair the irrigation system. The system shall be charged in spring, typically April, after the ground thaws and once plants emerge from dormancy. The system shall be winterized in the fall, typically late October, prior to the ground freezing. All necessary and standard irrigation practices for winterizing the system shall be performed. Following winterization of the irrigation system, any winter watering shall be done with a water tank or other manual method, to prevent damage to the system. Irrigation system elements should be checked periodically to maintain proper working condition, and replacement heads shall be replaced with the same brand/model to insure continued irrigation coverage. ANIMAL CONTROL All animals must be leashed when in the parklands. All park users must clean up their pet’s waste. 526 Bridger Vale PUD Parks Master Plan September 25, 2018 6 REFUSE There are no proposed refuse containers in the park. If the Bridger Vale POA provides refuse containers at a future date, the POA will be responsible for contracting with a waste collection contractor to have the refuse removed on a weekly basis. 527 APPENDIX A: PARK PLAN Refer to the Construction Documents for the park landscape plans. 528 APPENDIX B: OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 529 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 1 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN APPLICATION The City of Bozeman’s Affordable Housing Ordinance requires that any new subdivision development, site plan or annexation of 10 units (single detached or attached townhomes) or larger are required to submit an Affordable Housing Plan. This application is to be submitted in conjunction with a development plan. Please also provide a site plan highlighting the proposed affordable housing lots. 1.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONDevelopment Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Description:______________________________________________________________________________________________________ Property Owner Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Full Address:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone:____________________________ Email:____________________________________________________________________ Applicant Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Full Address:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone:____________________________ Email:____________________________________________________________________ Representative Name:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Full Address:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone:____________________________ Email:____________________________________________________________________ Property Full Street Address:_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Full Legal Description:__________________________________________________________________________________________ Current Zoning:_____________________ Current Use:_____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Community Plan Designation:__________________________________________________________________________________ 530 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 2 of 7 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 1.QUANTITY AND TYPE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS The City of Bozeman’s Affordable Housing Ordinance requirements: -10% of all units must be built lower priced (70% AMI) or -30% of all units must be built moderately prices (90% AMI) or -A combination of lower priced and moderately priced home to meet the requirements Townhomes Detached Homes Total Total Units in Development Market Rate Units Lower Priced Units – 10% of Total or Moderate-Priced Units – 30% of Total Fractional Units (Cash-in-Lieu) When entering numbers into the above table, if required number of units is as a decimal, the developer/builder has the option to round up to the next whole number of units or pay cash -in-lieu to cover that partial unit. -Example:(14 total units = 1.4 lower-priced, build 2 or build 1 and pay .4 * Cash-in-Lieu Rate) 2.CITY OF BOZEMAN MAXIMUM HOME PRICE & CASH-IN-LIEU SCHEDULE – 2017 AMI Pricing for homes in the Affordable Housing Program are set annually and are based off of the US Department of Housing & Urban Development’s (HUD) annual Area Median Income (AMI). 2018 Maximum Home Prices Studio (1-Person HH) 1-2 Bedroom (2-Person HH) 3+ Bedroom (4-person HH) Lower-Priced Home - 70% AMI $151,346 $173,291 $216,589 Moderate-Priced Home - 90% AMI $204,558 $233,936 $292,297 2018 Cash-in-Lieu Rates Formula 1 or 2 Bedrooms 3+ Bedrooms (Median Market Rate Sale Price – Lower-Priced Home Sales Price) $229,374 - $173,291 $314,407 - $216,518 Cash-in-Lieu $55,453 $97,889 2018 Fractional Fee Scale in Dollars .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1 or 2 bdrm 5,545 11,091 16,636 25,607 27,727 33,272 38,817 44,362 49,908 3+ bdrm 9,789 19,578 29,367 39,156 48,945 58,733 68,522 78,311 88,100 531 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 3 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 3.ELIGIBLE INCENTIVES (CHECK THOSE THAT APPLY BASED ON PROPOSED UNITS)Expedited Permit Review (All AH) Reduced Minimum Lot Sizes (All AH) Down Payment Assistance (70% AMI Sales Price & up to 80% AMI Buyer) Impact Fee Subsidy (70% AMI) Simultaneous Construction of Housing and Infrastructure (70% AMI) Reduced Parking (70% AMI) Reduction of Parkland (70% AMI) 4.AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLANThe Affordable Housing Plan must include answers to the following questions. 1.Explain the timing of the delivery of the affordable homes in relation to the market-rate homes inthe development? 532 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 4 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 2. Construction of affordable homes is required to be consistent with the makeup of the rest of the homes in the development. What is the mix of 1, 2 and 3+ bedrooms among market rate units and how will the affordable homes that are being proposed match with that? 3. Does the site have any unusual features (terrain, wetlands, rock outcroppings, streams, etc.) a. List any unusual features here. Townhomes Detached Homes Total 1 BDR 2 BDR 3+ BDR 1 BDR 2 BDR 3+ BDR Market Rate Units Lower-Price-Units Moderate-Priced Units 533 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 5 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 4. Are there any other special features within the development (how does the project meet the green building/renovation guidelines, cottage housing, common open space, dedicate parks, etc.)? a. List any special features here. 5. Explain the marketing plan for the sale of the affordable homes in the development. If you are going to be working with any partners, please list them here. (Possible partners include HRDC, the City of Bozeman, etc.) 534 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 6 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 6. Plan for the construction of Affordable Homes in a phased development. The Affordable Homes being built need to be consistent with the market-rate homes in development. If the exact number of units in a phased development is not known, the developer may estimate the total number of affordable homes (if not a phased development, do not fill out this part). Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Studio/1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 535 AH Affordable Housing Required Materials Page 7 of 8 Revision Date 04-06-2018 Required Forms: A1, AH Recommended Forms: 7. If Affordable Homes are not being built there may be two alternatives: a. Cash-in-lieu may be used as an alternative means to satisfy the requirements of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (1922). Approval must be received from the Affordable Housing Program Manager. Cash-in-lieu will be determined at time of application based on the current AMI for the area. (describe cash-in-lieu plan below if requesting this option): b. Land-donations may be used as an alternative means to satisfy the requirements of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (1922). Approval must be received from the Affordable Housing Program Manager. Land donation values and amount will be determined at time of application based of the current AMI for the area. (describe land-donation plan below if requesting this option): 536 537 Affordable Housing Plan Bridger Vale Subdivision (#14486) 1)Subdivision Statistics 20 number of lots proposed 2.0 10% of lots proposed 2)Cash‐in‐Lieu Calculations (10% @ 70% AMI) 245,950.00$           Average median sales price 2016/2017 for a condo/townhouse 181,982.00$           Lower‐priced home at 70% AMI 63,968.00$             CIL per unit at 70% AMI 127,936.00$          Total CIL of Affordable Housing Payment 3)Cash‐in‐Lieu Payment Schedule Section 38.380.140.C.2 allows for staged delivery of in‐lieu  contributions. A CIL payment of $6,396.80 (1/20th of the total CIL  payment) will be made prior to the certificate of occupancy being  granted for each lot. 538 539 ΔΔ540 ΔΔΔΔΔΔ541 542 ΔΔΔΔΔΔΔ Δ543 0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.61.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.21.50.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.52.90.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.22.91.80.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.00.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.50.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.21.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.50.00.00.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.11.04.60.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.05.40.90.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.11.20.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.31.10.00.01.30.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.40.95.40.00.00.00.80.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.73.50.00.00.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.03.60.50.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.92.20.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.21.64.10.50.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.31.10.70.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.11.05.01.70.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.50.00.60.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.10.11.80.30.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.21.00.80.01.90.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.41.20.33.50.00.00.20.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.74.00.00.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.51.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.21.04.30.41.20.50.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.30.30.40.91.81.11.00.30.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.43.01.14.80.03.80.70.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.20.40.20.20.20.10.00.10.20.00.00.00.50.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.30.00.04.30.81.42.30.30.10.21.23.70.00.03.90.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.43.60.00.20.50.00.00.00.60.70.20.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.41.50.10.84.40.20.10.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.00.63.10.30.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.01.60.40.50.40.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.01.02.80.50.20.10.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.02.11.11.80.73.21.20.10.00.00.70.30.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.80.50.20.20.20.30.20.10.00.00.72.60.50.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.53.40.90.20.10.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.10.30.20.10.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.018323-00445-R1Luminaire ScheduleSymbolQtyLabelArrangementTotal Lamp LumensLLFDescriptionLum. WattsLum. LumensBUG Rating1RFM-4SINGLEN.A.0.850RFM-72W32LED4K-T-4737142B1-U0-G240LPW7SINGLEN.A.0.850LPW7141154B1-U0-G0Calculation SummaryLabelCalcTypeUnitsAvgMaxMinAvg/MinMax/MinArea FC from WallpacksIlluminanceFc0.195.40.0N.A.N.A.Intersection FC at GradeIlluminanceFc0.370.80.13.708.000.30.30.40.40.50.60.60.30.30.40.40.50.60.70.30.30.40.50.50.60.70.80.30.30.40.50.50.60.70.70.80.30.30.40.40.50.60.60.70.70.80.80.30.30.40.40.50.50.60.60.70.70.70.20.30.30.40.40.50.50.50.60.60.60.60.20.20.30.30.40.40.50.50.50.50.50.50.20.20.30.30.30.40.40.40.50.50.50.50.20.20.20.30.30.30.40.40.40.40.40.40.20.20.20.20.30.30.30.30.40.40.30.30.20.20.20.20.20.30.30.30.30.30.30.30.10.20.20.20.20.20.20.30.30.30.30.30.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.20.20.20.20.20.10.10.10.10.10.20.2WALL MOUNTED FIXTURES ARE SHOWN AT 9 FEET ABOVE FINISHED GRADEROADWAY LIGHT FIXTURE IS SHOWN MOUNTED AT 35 FEET ABOVE FINISHED GRADEALL VALUES SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL MAINTAINED FOOTCANDLES AT GRADEFIXTURE DISTRIBUTION TEMPLATES ARE SHOWN AT 0.10 MFC FOR REFERENCE USE ONLYVALUES DO NOT INCLUDE CONTRIBUTION FROM ADJACENT STREET OR PROPERTY LIGHTING544 BRIDGER VALE DRIVEBRIDGER VALE DRIVEWGMGROUPWWW.WGMGROUP.COMPARKLAND PLANTING PLAN EBBIGHAUSEN HOMES BRIDGER VALE PUD BOZEMAN, MTDECEMBER 13, 2018L2.4 S TAT E OF MONTANA LANDSCAPE ARCH ITECT LESSA R.RACOW274 LICENSE D 545