Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19040 Building L at Cannery - DRB SR DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 1 of 13 Application No. 19040 Type Site Plan (SP) Project Name Building L at Cannery District Summary Site plan application for a 4-story, 61,966-square-foot, mixed use building with commercial and residential uses in the B-2 zoning district and the Cannery District PUD. The building includes 14,813 square feet of ground-floor commercial space; 52 residential units consisting of 15 studio, 25 one-bedroom and 12 two-bedroom units; and related site improvements. Zoning B-2 Growth Policy Regional Commercial and Services Parcel Size 19,218 sq. ft. Overlay District(s) N/A Street Address 221 E. Oak Street., Bozeman MT Legal Description Lot L, Imes Addition, Section 06, Township 02 South, Range 06 East Owner Cannery District Partners, LLC - Scott Dehlendorf, Barry Brown, 113 E. Oak Street 59715 Applicant See owner Staff Planner Addi Jadin Engineer Anna Russell Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Mailed Newspaper Legal Ad TBD TBD TBD N/A Advisory Boards Development Review Committee Adequacy determination TBD Advisory Boards Design Review Board Recommendation April 24, 2019 Recommendation Approval with conditions Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 2 of 13 PROJECT SUMMARY SECTION 38.230.040: DRB REVIEW THRESHOLDS When a development is subject to design review and meets one or more of the following thresholds the design review board must conduct the design review: 1. Forty-five or more dwelling units*; 2. Thirty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space, service commercial space or industrial space; 3. Four stories or more; 4. Twenty thousand or more square feet of exterior storage of materials or goods; 5. Parking for more than 90 vehicles* This application meets criteria 1 and 5. 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. CODE PROVISIONS Code provisions required by the Development Review Committee are still being satisfied by the applicant. All required revisions listed below are expected to be addressed prior to Site Plan approval. Engineering revisions under review: 1. Cash-in-lieu of water rights must be paid prior to Site Plan approval. 2. BMC Section 38.270.030.C. An Irrevocable Offer of Dedication needs to be submitted with the Concurrent Construction application. A DEQ approval letter must also be submitted. 3. ITE code on page 3 of the Traffic Impact Study letter shows 221 in the table and 231 below the table. Reconcile the discrepancy and resubmit the correct ITE Code. 4. If not already filed for the subject site, the applicant will need to provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a. Street improvements to E Oak Street (between N 7th Avenue and N Rouse Avenue) including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage b. Street improvements to N Rouse Avenue including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage c. Intersection improvements for E Oak Street and N Rouse Avenue d. Intersection improvements for Oak Street and N 7th Avenue The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the filed SID waiver prior to site plan approval. 5. BMC Section 38.230.100. The applicant did not respond to a Concept Review Comment related to making a clear comparison between trips generated from the original submittal to the current submittal with 52 more residential DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 3 of 13 units. The tables below displays the differences between the original PUD and current project trips generated based on building use and square footage. Include these or similar tables in the updated trip generation document. Figure 1: Vicinity Map of the Cannery District. DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 4 of 13 DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 5 of 13 Figure 2: Perspective Views of Proposed Site Plan DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 6 of 13 CANNERY DISTRICT PUD MASTER PLAN DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 7 of 13 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. Plan Review, Section 38.230.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the Director of Community Development shall consider the following: 1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy 38.100.040 B Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Regional Commercial and Services Yes Zoning B-2 Yes Comments: The uses are allowed within the zoning district with the approval of this application, pursuant to Section 38.310 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. The property is within the City’s municipal service area and otherwise complies with the goals and objectives of the growth policy. No conflicts between the proposed uses, zoning compliance and the growth policy are identified. 2. Conformance to this chapter, including the cessation of any current violations 38.200.160 Meets Code? Current Violations None Yes Comments: The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations 38.100.080 Meets Code? Conflicts None Yes Condominium ownership NA NA Comments: Private neighborhood bylaws, covenants, conditions and restrictions are not administered or enforced by the City of Bozeman. Applications are reviewed and evaluated against the Bozeman Municipal Code. No conflicts with the conformance with laws, ordinances and building regulations have been identified during the Site Plan review. 4. Conformance with special review criteria for applicable permit types as specified in article 2 Meets Code? Type Site Plan Yes Comments: The project is proposed within a Planned Unit Development. See further analysis of PUD Design Guidelines on page 12 of the report. 5. Conformance with zoning provisions of article 3 38.230.100 Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Mixed Use (commercial and residential) Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Yes Zoning B-2 Setbacks (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 8 of 13 Front NA – per PUD NA – internal lot Rear NA- per PUD NA internal Side NA- per PUD 5’ east side Alley NA NA Watercourse NA Wetland NA Block Frontage Landscaped NA Yes Comments: The property coincides with the building pad as established in the Master Site Plan and with PUD relaxation allowing zero lot line setbacks. A 5-foot side setback along the east property line, along with the open space to the east allows adequate light and air for the upper story residential uses. A departure was requested and approved by the DRC. Relationship to adjacent properties standards 38.520.030 (light and air access and privacy) and angled setback plane 38.360.030 Yes Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-340 NA Building Height Requirements 38.320.010-.060 Yes Lot coverage 92.5% Allowed 100% Height 45’-2” to truss bearing; 49’ to parapet; 54 feet top of elevator/circulation column Allowed 57’ < 3:12 pitch (allowed 4-foot parapet encroachment) Yes Comments: A no build agreement is required from the POA to ensure adequate light and air access is maintained despite zero lot line setbacks. The applicants have requested a departure from the standards of 38.520.030. due to the cumulative 17.5’ provided by the building setback on the east side, 11 feet of open space and 1.5-foot building setback for the adjacent building concurrently under Site Plan review. In B-2 zoning with underlying Regional and Commercial Growth Policy designation, max height for flat roof is 57 feet. The PUD projected the building height for Lot L to be approximately 44 feet but allows heights in compliance with the UDC. (See Attached Design Guidelines) 6a(1). Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4: Transportation facilities and access 38.400 Meets Code? Street vision triangles Yes Yes Secondary access Yes Traffic Impact Study / LOS Yes, Required Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes No – in review Comments: Revisions to the Traffic Impact Study are under review by the Engineering Division. Street dedication NA Yes Drive access locations and widths NA Number of drive accesses NA – within PUD NA Street easements NA Special Improvement Districts NA NA Comments: The project is within an existing PUD. No new drive accesses were required. Conformance with this section or Article 4 was reviewed by the Engineering Division. No outstanding code provisions were identified. 6a(2). Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4: Pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress 38.400 Meets Code? DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 9 of 13 Design of the pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems to assure that pedestrians and vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site and between properties and activities within the neighborhood area Yes Pedestrian access location(s) Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Non-automotive transportation and circulation systems, design features to enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including, but not limited to paving patterns, grade differences, landscaping and lighting Crosswalks Yes Curb ramps Yes Pedestrian lighting Yes Comments: Lot within existing PUD with approved Master Plan Adequate connection and integration of the pedestrian and vehicular transportation systems to the systems in adjacent development and the general community Yes Access easements NA Yes Dedication of right-of-way or easements necessary for pedestrian, shared use pathway and similar transportation facilities NA Comments: The property ties into and relies on the overall Cannery District PUD Master Plan for vehicular and pedestrian transportation. 6b Community design and element provisions 38.410 Meets Code? Lot and block standards 38.410.040 NA Rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation NA Comments: No block frontage requirements apply for building without frontage. The Rail Trail pedestrian path described in PUD design guidelines provides frontage requirements. Provisions for utilities including efficient public services and utilities 38.410.050-060 Yes Municipal infrastructure requirements NA Easements (City and public utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes Water, sewer, and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water rights Inadequate Comments: A code correction is requested regarding cash-in-lieu of water rights information provided. Will be resolved prior to site plan approval. Site Surface Drainage and stormwater control 38.410.080 Yes Location, design and capacity Yes Landscaping per 38.410.080.H Yes Comments: Grading and drainage plan was reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division. Grading 38.410.080 Yes Maximum 1:4 slope requirements met Yes Comments: Grading plan was approved by Engineering. 6c. Park and recreation requirements 38.420 Meets Code? Enhancement of natural environment NA Wildlife habitat or feeding area preservation NA Maintenance of public park or public open space access Yes Park/Recreational area design Yes Parkland Cash-in-lieu for maximum known density not to exceed 12 units/acre (ac.). NA DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 10 of 13 _.44 ac. X 12 units/ac. X 0.03 ac.= __0.1584___ ac. (6900 sf) Cash donation in-lieu Yes; $10,350 Inadequate Improvements in-lieu NA NA 1. Comments: Cash-in-lieu of parkland to be reviewed by the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. Additional information was requested and will be provided by Planning Staff. Payment is due prior to Site Plan approval. 7a-c. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Compatibility, Design and Arrangement Meets Code? Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development relative to architectural design, building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of buildings on the site and visual integration Yes Block Frontage Standards 38.510 NA Building Design 38.530 Yes Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: Yes. Design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes Relationship to adjacent properties 38.520.030 Yes Non-motorized circulation and design 38.520.040 Yes Vehicular circulation and parking 38.520.050 Yes Comments: The project complies with the Master Plan for the PUD and emphasizes pedestrian pathways, particularly along the east-west pedestrian “Rail Trail” Design and arrangement of elements of the plan (e.g., buildings circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) in harmony with the existing natural topography, natural water bodies and water courses, existing vegetation, and to contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration NA Site Planning and Design Elements 38.520 Comments: The project complies with the Master Site Plan for the PUD. The organization of buildings around the Rail Trail emphasizes the pedestrian corridor through the site. 7d. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Landscaping including the enhancement of buildings, appearance of vehicular use, open space and pedestrian area and the preservation of replacement of natural vegetation Meets Code? Submittal requirements for landscape plans 38.220.100 Yes Mandatory landscaping 38.550.050 Yes Yard Yes Additional screening NA Parking lot screening NA Interior parking lot landscape Yes – according to PUD Off-street loading spaces screening NA Street frontage NA Street median island NA DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 11 of 13 Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Trees for residential adjacency NA Performance points 15 points required- Phase 3 PUD NA City rights-of-way and parks Yes Yes Tree plantings for boulevard ROW, drought-resistant seed Na Public ROW boulevard strips NA Irrigation and maintenance provisions for ROW NA State ROW landscaping NA Additional NA NA Fencing and walls NA NA Comments: Landscaping plan conforms to PUD Landscaping Plan. Pedestrian area landscaping, including pathways and internal circulation 38.520.040 Yes Internal roadway landscaping 38.520.050 NA Open space landscaping 38.520.060 Yes Service area and mechanical equipment landscaping and screening 38.520.070 Yes Comments: Landscaping plan conforms to PUD Landscaping Plan 7e. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Open Space Meets Code? Open Space Yes Total required (sf) Residential: 5800; Commercial: See PUD Yes Total provided (sf) 5811 Yes Comments: Open space has been provided as a combination of private balconies; indoor and outdoor (rooftop) on the 4th floor; and by showing ample PUD open space to account for additional residential open space requirements. 7f. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Lighting 38.570 Meets Code? Building-mounted lighting (cutoff and temperature) Yes Site lighting (supports, cutoff and temperature) Yes Minimum light trespass at property line Yes Comments: 7g. Conformance with the project design provisions of Article 5, Signage 38.560 Meets Code? Allowed (sq. ft)/building NA NA Proposed (sq. ft) NA Comments: No signage is approved with the approval of this application. A sign permit is required for the installation of all signage. 8a-c. Conformance with environmental and open space objectives in articles 4- 6 Meets Code? Enhancement of natural environment: Integrated stormwater, LID, removal of inappropriate fill NA – existing Grading Yes On-site retention/detention NA – existing Comments: The grading and drainage plan was reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division. DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 12 of 13 Detention Drainage design NA Stormwater maintenance plan 38.410.030.A Yes Stormwater feature: bioswales, storm drain route to existing detention within PUD Yes Comments: As planned for PUD. Watercourse and wetland protections and associated wildlife habitats NA If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area NA Comments: NA 9. Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of articles 4-6 Meets Code? Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan NA Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: No watercourses or wetlands are present. 12. Phasing of development 38.230.020.B including buildings and infrastructure Meets Code? Phasing No # of phases NA Yes Comments: NA Planning has reviewed the application for the relevant PUD guidelines and finds that the project conforms to the requirements. Further analysis will be provided at DRB presentation by staff. Section 1 - Project Overview 1.00 Project Overview 1.01 Improvements Schedule 1.02 Project Uses 1.03 PUD Information Section 2 - Site Guidelines 2.00 Site Design Overview 2.01 SiteSignage 2.02 Access Circulation and Parking 2.03 Pedestrian Access and Open Space 2.04 Site Grading and Drainage 2.05 Utilities, Communications and Refuse 2.06 Site Lighting Section 3 - Landscape Design Guidelines 3.00 Landscape Design Overview 3.01 Vegetation 3.02 Hardscape 3.03 Maintenance Section 4 - Building Design 4.00 Building Design Overview 4.01 Dimensional Considerations DRB Staff Report Building L at Cannery District Site Plan Review Application: 19040 April 16, 2019 Page 13 of 13 4.02 Programmatic Considerations 4.03 Building Exterior 4.04 Building Lighting 4.05 Building Signage4.00 Building Design Overview 4.01 Dimensional Considerations 4.02 Programmatic Considerations 4.03 Building Exterior 4.04 Building Lighting 4.05 Building Signage