Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-11-21 Zoning Commission Agenda & Packet MaterialsA. Call meeting to order B. Disclosures C. Approval of Minutes C.1 Minutes Approval(Rogers) D. 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 THE ZONING COMMISSION OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA ZC AGENDA Monday, January 11, 2021 WebEx Meeting Information Via Webex: https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php? MTID=e78f17f788eafe16b4c30c44cef16c174 Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream or channel 190 • Call-in toll number (US/Canada ): 1-650-479-3208 • Access code: 126 268 6875 Public Comment: If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda, please send an email to agenda@ bozeman.net prior to 12:00pm on Monday, January 11th, 2020. You may also comment by visiting the City's public comment page. You can also comment by joining the Webex meeting. If you do join the Webex meeting, we ask you please be patient in helping us work through this online meeting. If you are not able to join the Webex meeting and would like to provide oral comment you may send a request to agenda@bozeman.net with your phone number, the item(s) you wish to comment on, and someone will call you during the meeting to provide an opportunity to comment. You may also send the above information via text to 406-224-3967. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the City's video page (click the Streaming Live in the drop down menu), and available in the City on cable channel 190. Bozeman Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda, January 11, 2021 1 limit your comments to three minutes. E. Special Presentation F. Action Items F.1 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment, 5400 Fowler Lane, to establish an initial municipal zoning of R-5, Residential Mixed Use High Density Zoning District on Approximately 20.3 Acres, Application 20112.(Saunders) G. FYI/Discussion H. Adjournment For more information please contact Tom Rogers at trogers@bozeman.net This board generally meets the 2nd and 4th Monday of each month from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM 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). Bozeman Zoning Commission Meeting Agenda, January 11, 2021 2 Memorandum REPORT TO: Zoning Commission FROM: Tom Rogers SUBJECT: Minutes Approval MEETING DATE: January 11, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Minutes RECOMMENDATION: Approve meeting minutes for November 23rd, 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN: 1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from the community and stakeholders. BACKGROUND: None UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: As determined by Zoning Commissioners FISCAL EFFECTS: None Attachments: 11-23-20 Zoning Commission Minutes DRAFT.pdf Report compiled on: December 11, 2020 3 Zoning Commission Monday, November 23rd, 2020 at 6:00 PM | Virtual Meeting via WebEx This meeting will be held using Webex, an online videoconferencing system. You can join this meeting: Via Webex: https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php?MTID=e8896b056769dc3d55d4ce16693d68768 Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit. Click Join Now to enter the meeting Via Phone: This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream or channel 190  Call-in toll number (US/Canada): 1-650-479-3208  Access code: 126 057 3062 Public Comment: If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda, please send an email to agenda@ bozeman.net prior to 12:00pm on Monday, November 23rd, 2020. You may also comment by visiting the City's public comment page. You can also comment by joining the Webex meeting. If you do join the Webex meeting, we ask you please be patient in helping us work through this online meeting. If you are not able to join the Webex meeting and would like to provide oral comment you may send a request to agenda@bozeman.net with your phone number, the item(s) you wish to comment on, and someone will call you during the meeting to provide an opportunity to comment. You may also send the above information via text to 406-224-3967. As always, the meeting will be streamed through the City's video page (click the Streaming Live in the drop down menu), and available in the City on cable channel 190. A. 06:01:57 PM (00:10:22) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call Present Were:  Christopher Scott (Chairman)  Mark Genito  Nicole Olmstead  Paul Spitler  Tom Rogers (Staff Liaison)  Chris Saunders (City Staff) B. 06:04:55 PM (00:13:20) Changes to the Agenda C. 06:05:01 PM (00:13:26) Approve Meeting Minutes (NONE) D. 06:05:06 PM (00:13:31) Disclosures 4 E. 06:05:14 PM (00:13:39) 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. F. Action Items 1. 06:07:16 PM (00:15:41) Bozeman Cohousing Text Amendment (#20195) (Saunders) Amending the allowed uses in the R-3 Medium Density Residential to R-O Residential Office zoning districts to create a new residential configuration Apartment Building, Limited with associated standards.. • 20195 Staff Report • 20195 Application Materials City Planner, Chris Saunders, presented the Zone Text Amendment on behalf of Bozeman Community Development. 06:10:35 PM (00:19:00) Planner Saunders reviewed the five sections of the Unified Development which would be amended. 06:17:02 PM (00:25:27) Planner Saunders reviewed proposed elements that staff did not agree with as well as the Zoning Criteria of Evaluation. 06:22:08 PM (00:30:33) Commission members directed questions toward staff. 06:29:17 PM (00:37:42) Architect, Erik Bonnett, presented on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Bonnett reviewed the type and quantity of homes possible in a single building. He also reviewed what is currently allowed in R-3 zoning versus proposed. 06:40:24 PM (00:48:49) Mr. Bonnett reviewed areas where the applicant disagreed with staff, including the limited square footage with common space. 06:48:09 PM (00:56:34) Applicant, Erik Bonnett, responded to questions from Commission members. 07:00:32 PM (01:08:57) Public Comment Opportunity 07:01:19 PM (01:09:44) Anne Johnson (2649 Blackbird Dr.) asked Commission members to support the amendment as proposed, citing benefits of common indoor space for those who may be limited. 07:03:20 PM (01:11:45) Brianne Rogers (399 Concord Dr.) voiced concern regarding unintentional changes to the character of the neighborhood. 07:05:07 PM (01:13:32) Chad Welborn (4535 Fallon St.) supported the text amendment, saying Bozeman needs options for creative solutions and flexibility in housing configurations that preserve character in zoning districts with scale and mass. 5 07:06:23 PM (01:14:48) Karen Kitchen (3278 Hidden Springs Lane) supported the amendment as proposed by the applicant. Ms. Kitchen stated that creative solutions will be necessary with the increased population in Bozeman. 07:07:49 PM (01:16:13) Katherine Dayton (1214 E. Curtiss St.) supported the amendment as proposed, echoing the reasons stated by previous commenters. 07:09:15 PM (01:17:40) Mark Owkes (318 S. 9th Ave) supported the proposed amendment, stating that small homes are a good thing. 07:11:26 PM (01:19:51) Marni Rolston (Wagon Wheel Rd.) supported the amendment as proposed, stating this is a good way to increase density, and create affordable communities and neighborhoods. 07:13:58 PM (01:22:23) Board member, Mark Genito asked about flexibility with common area square footage. Planner Saunders did emphasize that homes can be as large as they’d like, within the building envelope. He also shared that in Appendix A, a departure is possible, which is a tool used to address design limitations. 07:17:12 PM (01:25:37) Staff explained the justification for the 2,000 square foot restriction. 07:27:31 PM (01:35:56) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented by the applicant in 20195 and move to recommend approval of the Bozeman Cohousing Text Amendment with contingencies required to complete the application process.: Mark Genito 07:27:52 PM (01:36:17) MOTION SECONDED: Paul Spitler 07:28:05 PM (01:36:30) Commission members discussed the motion, stating that they prefer the added flexibility proposed by the applicant. Chairman Christopher Scott stated that he would not be supporting the motion, as there should be a limit on common space. 07:30:05 PM (01:38:30) Commission member, Paul Spitler stated that he felt that the limitations are necessary, but that added flexibility is needed and permissible, and that for that reason, he will not be supporting the motion. 07:31:34 PM (01:39:59) Nicole Olmstead stated that she was concerned that not having a threshold for common open space would prevent predictability and that she won’t be supporting the motion. 07:32:40 PM (01:41:05) VOTE: 2 For; 2 Against: Motion failed 07:33:19 PM (01:41:44) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20195 and move to recommend approval of the Bozeman Cohousing Text Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing: Nicole Olmstead 07:34:00 PM (01:42:25) Discussion – Olmstead stated that she agreed with the 2,000 sq. foot limitation on common open space, but opportunity for departure, if it’s justifiable. Others supported. 6 07:35:41 PM (01:44:06) VOTE: 4-0; Motion Carried Unanimously 2. 07:36:57 PM (01:45:22) Front Setback Definition Text Amendment, Ordinance 2061 (#20147) (Saunders) Revise definitions and references to clarify a consistent meaning and application of front setbacks in all zoning district. No changes to dimensional standards are included with this amendment. Revise affected sections to implement the revisions. • 20147 Staff Report & Draft Ordinance 2061 07:37:27 PM (01:45:52) City Planner, Chris Saunders introduced the application, initiated by the City of Bozeman to address some “frequent flier” issues that are unclear. He clarified that it does not modify the setback or how the code is applied, it is only intended to clarify and make more readily understandable. 07:40:53 PM (01:49:18) Planner Saunders showed a graphic that illustrates what is considered a “front setback” 07:41:12 PM (01:49:37) Commission members directed questions to staff. Commission members discussed public comment submitted and Planner Saunders shared that he would be willing to review the suggestions and consider additional clarification, barring no unintended consequences. 07:44:23 PM (01:52:48) Public Comment Opportunity 07:44:29 PM (01:52:54) Ryan Krueger provided public comment asking to take the opportunity while examining this section of the code to consider other changes to add more clarification. 07:46:18 PM (01:54:43) Commission members discussed the proposed text amendment and the public comment submitted. Chris Saunders suggested that Commission members add a recommendation to evaluate inclusion of the comment when making the motion and ask that staff look closer at the comments. 07:50:07 PM (01:58:32) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20147 and move to recommend approval of Ordinance 2061; adding a request for staff to consider the comments and – dated November 23rd, 2020 from Ryan Krueger and Tyler Steinway to determine whether the additional clarification is appropriate prior to bringing the amendment forward to City Commission for consideration: Nicole Olmstead 07:51:16 PM (01:59:41) MOTION SECONDED: Mark Genito 07:51:30 PM (01:59:55) Discussion 07:52:00 PM (02:00:24) VOTE: 4-0; Motion Carried Unanimously 3. 07:52:30 PM (02:00:54) Building Heights, Part 1 Text Amendment, Ordinance 2062 (#20147) (Miller) Revise language for clarity and consistent application of first floor required height standards in five non-residential zoning districts, and revise paragraph a.1 of subchapter 4b of the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. No changes to maximum height dimensional standards are included with this amendment. Revise affected sections to implement the revisions. 7 • 20147 Staff Report & Draft Ordinance 2062 07:53:05 PM (02:01:30) City Planner, Jacob Miller, introduced the proposed amendment which is an editorial cleanup amendment to offer additional clarity, specifying that the restriction only applies to the ground floor and how the height will be measured. 07:56:04 PM (02:04:29) Planner Miller reviewed the Zoning Criteria of Evaluation and public comment received. 07:57:09 PM (02:05:34) Commission Members directed questions toward Planner Miller. 08:00:11 PM (02:08:35) Public Comment Opportunity 08:00:53 PM (02:09:18) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20147 and move to recommend approval of the Building Heights Part 1 Text Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing: Mark Genito 08:01:19 PM (02:09:44) MOTION SECONDED: Nicole Olmstead 08:01:27 PM (02:09:51) Motion Discussion 08:02:35 PM (02:10:59) VOTE: 4-0; Motion Carried Unanimously 4. 08:03:09 PM (02:11:34) Entryway Facing Street Text Amendment, Ordinance 2063 (#20147) (Rogers) Clarify the intent of a portion of Ordinance No. 1978 stating that building entries must face the street for new Single, two, three, and four-household dwellings. No changes to dimensional standards are included with this amendment. Revise affected sections to implement the revisions. • 20147 Staff Report & Draft Ordinance 2063 08:03:14 PM (02:11:39) City Planner, Tom Rogers, shared that they are working to provide additional clarification and transparency to the code section referring to 1-4 residential unit structures, not apartment buildings. 08:05:56 PM (02:14:21) Planner Rogers reviewed the Unified Development Code changes included in the ordinance. 08:07:45 PM (02:16:10) Planner Rogers reviewed the Zoning Criteria of Evaluation and public comment received. 08:09:41 PM (02:18:06) Committee Members directed questions toward City Staff. Planner Rogers explained the intent of the change. 08:15:05 PM (02:23:30) Public Comment 08:15:18 PM (02:23:43) Jerry Pape (11 N. 25th Ave) commented regarding “snout houses” where garage doors are out in front of the front façade of a property. Mr. Pape commented that the garage doors provide privacy and that the front facing porches still provide community interaction. 8 08:22:58 PM (02:31:23) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20147 and move to recommend approval of Ordinance 2063: Nicole Olmstead 08:23:29 PM (02:31:54) MOTION SECONDED: Paul Spitler 08:24:38 PM (02:33:03) Motion Discussion – Commission members deliberated on whether this change was too restrictive. 08:28:24 PM (02:36:49) VOTE: 1 For; 3 Against: Motion Failed G. 08:29:32 PM (02:37:57) FYI/Discussion 1. Other Updates H. 08:29:42 PM (02:38:07) Adjournment For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.net. This board generally meets the second and fourth Monday of the month at 6:00pm Zoning Commission 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). 9 Memorandum REPORT TO: Zoning Commission SUBJECT: Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment, 5400 Fowler Lane, to establish an initial municipal zoning of R-5, Residential Mixed Use High Density Zoning District on Approximately 20.3 Acres, Application 20112. MEETING DATE: January 11, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Community Development - Legislative RECOMMENDATION: Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20112 and move to recommend approval of the Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. STRATEGIC PLAN: 4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods. BACKGROUND: The City reviews applications for annexation and zone map amendments as they are submitted by the landowner. The landowner submitted an application to annex a single parcel and adjacent right of way of Fowler Avenue. Annexation of the road is required by state law. There is one existing home on the parcel. The property is located adjacent to the City boundary at Meadow Creek Park at 30th Avenue. The application proposes an initial designation of R-5, Residential Mixed Use High Density District. This application does not authorize any construction. Prior to any further development of the site a subdivision or site plan review (or both) must be submitted, reviewed, and approved. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None ALTERNATIVES: 1. Recommend denial of the zone map amendment application based on the Zoning Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 2. 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. FISCAL EFFECTS: No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Zone Map Amendment. Future development will incur costs and generate revenue according to 10 standard City practices. Attachments: 20112 Buffalo Run ZMA ZC SR 1-06-2021.pdf ZC Packet Application Materials Combined.pdf Report compiled on: January 6, 2021 11 Page 1 of 31 20112 Staff Report for the Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Public Hearings: Zoning Commission (zoning map amendment only) January 11, 2021 City Commission (Annexation and zoning map amendment) February 9, 2021 Project Description: Annexation of 20.79 acres and amendment of the City Zoning Map for the establishment of a zoning designation of R-5. Project Location: 5400 Fowler Lane. Recommendation: Meets standards for approval with contingencies. Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20112 and move to recommend approval of the Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. Report: January 6, 2020 Staff Contact: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to date. This report only addresses the zoning amendment as the Zoning Commission only considers the zone map amendment. A revised report addressing both the annexation and the zoning amendment will be made available prior to the City Commission hearing on the application. Unresolved Issues There are no identified conflicts between the City and Applicant regarding the zoning at this time. Project Summary The City reviews applications for annexation and zone map amendments as they are submitted by the landowner. The landowner submitted an application to annex a single parcel and adjacent right of way of Fowler Avenue. Annexation of the road is required by state law. There is one existing home on the parcel. The property is located adjacent to the City boundary at Meadow Creek Park at 30th Avenue. 12 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 2 of 31 The application proposes an initial designation of R-5, Residential Mixed Use High Density District. This application does not authorize any construction. Prior to any further development of the site a subdivision or site plan review (or both) must be submitted, reviewed, and approved. The following public adopted planning documents support urban development for the subject area if development is proposed on the site: • Bozeman Community Plan 2020 • Gallatin County growth policy • Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan – County neighborhood plan • Transportation Master Plan 2017 – City transportation plan • Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan 2007 – Gallatin County Transportation Plan • Water Facility Plan 2017 – City’s plan for water system operations and expansion • Wastewater Facility Plan 2015 – City’s plan for wastewater system operations and expansion Zoning Commission The Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on January 11, 2021 before making a recommendation on the proposed zoning. Zoning Commission Alternatives 1. Recommend denial of the zone map amendment application based on the Zoning Commission’s articulated findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 2. 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. Public Comment Written comments are available for review at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/fol/229536/Row1.aspx. As comments are received they will be added to this folder and be available to the public, Zoning Commission, and City Commission. 13 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 3 of 31 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Zoning Commission ............................................................................................................ 2 Zoning Commission Alternatives ....................................................................................... 2 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .................................................................................................... 4 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT..... 8 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 8 Annexation .......................................................................................................................... 8 Zone Map Amendment ....................................................................................................... 9 SECTION 4 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............. 9 Spot Zoning Criteria ......................................................................................................... 26 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 28 APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 29 APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ................... 29 APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ............................ 30 FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 30 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 30 14 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 4 of 31 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Project Vicinity Map (2018 air photo) 15 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 5 of 31 Project Vicinity Map Showing the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 Future Land Use Map – Subject property is designated as Urban Neighborhood Project Vicinity Map Showing Near Vicinity Municipal Zoning 16 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 6 of 31 Project Vicinity Map Showing Larger Vicinity Municipal Zoning – project outlined in light blue 17 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 7 of 31 Project Vicinity Map Showing Adjacent County and Municipal Zoning. The light green shade is the AS zoning district established by Gallatin County. 18 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 8 of 31 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the proposed amendment. These contingencies only apply in the event that the related annexation request has previously been approved. Recommended Contingencies of Approval: 1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning designation shall be identified as the “Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment.” All required documents must be returned to the City within 60 days of the City’s distribution of the annexation agreement or the preliminary approval shall be null and void. 2. That the Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be finalized until the Annexation Agreement is signed by the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission. If the annexation agreement is not approved, the Zone Map Amendment application approval shall be null and void. 3. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied on: 1) a mylar for City records (either 18" by 24" or 24” by 36” size); 2) a reduced 8 ½" x 11" or 8 ½” by 14" exhibit for filing with the Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder; 3) an editable digital copy for the City Engineer’s Office; and 4) a PDF. This map must be acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office, and must be submitted within 60 days of the action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent right-of-ways or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be rezoned; unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to existing platted properties or certificates of survey. 4. The Ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides an editable metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor. SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS Annexation The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application. The City Commission will hold a public meeting on the annexation on February 9, 2021. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. The meeting will conducted through WebEx. Instructions on joining the meeting will be included on the meeting agenda. 19 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 9 of 31 Zone Map Amendment Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff finds the application meets criteria for approval as submitted. The Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is in conjunction with an annexation request. Staff’s recommendation and staff responses are predicated on approval of the annexation, application 20112. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the amendment. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application. The Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this ZMA on January 11, 2021 and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map amendment. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on February 9, 2021. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. The meeting will conducted through WebEx. Instructions on joining the meeting will be included on the meeting agenda. SECTION 4 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a legislative action, the Commission has discretion to determine a policy direction. The burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the Applicant. See the application materials for the Applicant’s response to the criteria. A zone map amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health, public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met. In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the zone map amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met, Staff considers the entire body of regulations for land development. Standards which prevent or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code. 20 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 10 of 31 Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Yes. The application was initially submitted on April 9, 2020. Additional information was requested from the applicant relating to infrastructure capacity. Information was submitted on August 5th and November 11th , 2020. The applicant materials addressed the growth policy then in place. On November 17, 2020, the City Commission adopted a new growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, (BCP 2020). The new growth policy was adopted before any public notices were issued and public review of the application began. The current growth policy is the applicable basis for review. Therefore, the Staff’s review examines the growth policy now in place and all references are to that document. The BCP 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review Criteria For Zoning Amendments And Their Application, discusses how the various criteria in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application of the criteria varies depending on whether an amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC. The first criterion for a zoning amendment is accordance with a growth policy. Future Land Use Map The proposed amendment is a change to the zoning map. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze compliance with the future land use map. Chapter 3 of the BCP 2020 addresses the future land use map. The introduction to that chapter discusses the importance of the chapter. Following are some excerpts. “Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents.” “The land use map sets generalized expectations for what goes where in the community. Each category has its own descriptions. Understanding the future land use map is not possible without understanding the category descriptions.” The area of this application has been included as an urban expansion area in the City’s adopted land use plan since 2001. As shown on the maps in Section 1, on the excerpt of the current future land use map, the property is designated as Urban Neighborhood. The adjacent unannexed property is also designated as Urban Neighborhood. The Urban Neighborhood designation description reads: “This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood- serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The 21 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 11 of 31 Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car.” The correlation between the future land use map of the growth policy and the zoning districts is presented in Table 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. As shown in the following excerpt from Table 4, the R-5 district is an implementing district of the Urban Neighborhood category. The future land use map excerpt included in Section 1 shows locations for commercial and service development to the northeast at Stucky and S. 19th Avenue, and southeast at Blackwood Road and S. 19th Avenue. The area along Stucky is more developed at this time but is not annexed. Residential Mixed Use designations are located across S. 19th Avenue adjacent to the same streets. The mixed use areas are presently in development review. The zoning map amendment is in accordance with the future land use map. Goals and Policies A zoning amendment is also evaluated against the goals and policies of the BCP 2020. Most of the goals and policies are not applicable to this application. Relevant goals and objectives have been identified by staff. Conflict with the text of the growth policy hasn’t been identified. The Short Term Action list on page 63 of the BCP 2020 describes 14 items to implement the growth policy. The first two relate to direct changes to the zoning map in support of listed goals and objectives. These include increasing the intensity of zoning districts in already developed areas. Beginning on page 71 of the BCP 2020 in the section titled Zoning Amendment Review, the document discusses how the City implements zoning for new areas, amendments to areas, and revisions to existing text. This section includes a discussion of when the City may initiate a zoning change to a more intensive district to increase development opportunities. This section demonstrates that the City, as a matter of policy, is supportive of more intensive zoning districts and development, even within already 22 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 12 of 31 developed areas. It is inconsistent with this approach to zone at annexation for lower intensities than what infrastructure and planning documents will support. This policy approach does not specify any individual district but does lean towards the more intensive portion of the zoning district spectrum. “Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units.” The R-5 district allows construction of the full range of residential buildings in the City. This supports the opportunity for diversity of supply. Quality of housing cannot be assessed at this time but will be reviewed with subsequent development review for compliance with adopted standards. The City’s Community Housing Needs Assessment documented a shortage of housing within the City and encourages additional housing construction. “Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City.” The proposed zoning is occurring in conjunction with an annexation. Any future development will be required to occur at urban densities and will be within the City. If the City Commission declines the annexation then the requested R-5 zoning will not occur. “DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses.” Fowler Avenue is a planned arterial street as shown in the last three long range transportation plans including the current Transportation Master Plan adopted in 2017. Arterial streets are the most intensive category of streets. Fowler Avenue is planned to extend from Hyalite Canyon to Valley Center Road. This street will develop to be a main corridor. Therefore, placement of higher density development adjacent to Fowler Avenue is consistent with this objective. Fowler is presently developed as a rural standard road. Evaluation of the degree of required road improvements will occur with formal development review. “RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.” Gallatin County adopted the Gallatin County/Bozeman Area Plan (GCBA Plan), a neighborhood plan under their growth policy, to identify County priorities for this area of the county. Implementing zoning was updated for the new neighborhood plan and is now in place. “The purposes of the [County] Growth Policy and the 2005 Bozeman Area Plan are to provide comprehensive, long-range guidance relative to the growth and development…” The GCBA Plan recognizes the area is in transition. On page 1 of the GCBA Plan it says, “It is not the intent of this Plan to prematurely discourage existing agricultural operations; rather it is the intent to accommodate the needs of present agriculture while recognizing an inevitable transition to a more urban landscape.” 23 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 13 of 31 The GCBA Plan future land use map designates this property and the surrounding unannexed area as Moderate-intensity development. This is described as “Development of additional medium-density residential, conservation subdivisions, neighborhood commercial, office, and public uses. Development of additional appropriate high-density residential, community commercial, office park, and public uses.” The proposed R-5 zone provides for uses consistent with this description. The GCBA Plan includes various goals and policies. Several are provided here as examples of the correlation between RC-3.2, the GCBA Plan, and the application under review. “GOAL 1: Encourage Residential Development. Residential development at appropriate densities is generally encouraged within the Plan area. The identification of areas suitable for near-term residential development is a location-specific goal. Medium to high-density development, or urban-scale development, is encouraged to annex to the City of Bozeman. It is recognized that the County is ill equipped to deal with urban-scale development which would be better managed through provision of municipal services.” Policy “4. Promote residential development adjacent to existing developed land and infill development, and that does not foster sprawl development or development which is located far from services. • Support development within or adjacent to existing developed areas, including infill development. • Promote development that is compact and makes efficient use of land. • Encourage development within close proximity to city limits to pursue annexation opportunities with City of Bozeman.” Gallatin County has zoned the adjacent area as AS, Agricultural Suburban, which supports continued agriculture and very low density residential development. This zoning decision keeps the rural areas as rural until such time as municipal services can be made available and annexation and development are achievable. Thus, the BCP 2020 objective is met. “RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its utilities.” The zone map amendment is proposed in association with an annexation. The area to be annexed is adjacent to the City boundary. It does create a 20 acre peninsula with county property on three sides at this time. It is expected that additional annexations in the future will make the City boundary more regular. The property is located within the service area of the municipal utilities and can be served with existing mains and incremental extensions. While the City would welcome simultaneous annexation of the properties to the north and 24 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 14 of 31 south as well as the applicant’s property, a single parcel annexation is the application that has been submitted. “RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas.” The property is adjacent to the City and does not create any new unannexed areas surrounded by City limits. The property is seeking annexation and municipal zoning for the purpose of residential development. Annexation is happening before development. The application is in accordance with the growth policy. B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Yes. The application of the development standards of the City will provide for safe construction, fire protection water supply through water main extensions, and police response will be provided after annexation. The 2017 Fire Master Plan of the City evaluated ability to serve this area as the City builds out its fire response facilities. The City’s development standards will require adequate emergency response access, addressing for rapid response, and the site is outside of any known flood hazards. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Yes. See comments in Criteria B and D. City development standards included in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, building codes, and engineering standards all ensure that this criterion is met. Adequate water and sewer supply and conveyance provide for public health through clean water. Rapid and effective emergency response provides for public safety. General welfare has been evaluated during the adoption of Chapter 38 and found to be advanced. Provision of parks, control of storm water, and other features of the City’s development standards advance the general welfare. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Yes. The BCP 2020, page 74, says regarding evaluation of Criteria B-D for zoning amendments: “For a map amendment, all three of the above elements are addressed primarily by the City’s long range facility Plans, the City’s capital improvements program, and development standards adopted by the City. The standards set minimum sizing and flow requirements, require dedication of parks, provision of right of way for people and vehicles, keep development out of floodplains, and other items to address public safety, etc. It is often difficult to assess these issues in detail on a specific site. For example, at the time of annexation, the final intensity of development is unknown and it may be many years before development occurs and the impacts are experienced. 25 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 15 of 31 The availability of other planning and development review tools must be considered when deciding the degree of assurance needed to apply an initial zoning at annexation.” The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service needed by new development. The City implements these plans through its capital improvements program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling, and financing of construction. Private development must demonstrate compliance with standards. Dedication of school facilities is not required by municipal zoning standards. However, School District 7 will have opportunity to review and comment on future development. The application site is located within the City’s land use, transportation, parks, and utility planning areas and those plans show this property as developing within the City when development is proposed. Adequacy of all these public requirements is evaluated during the subdivision and site development process. As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. All zoning districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and intensities. At time of future subdivision or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity. 38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.” Future development of the area will require dedication and construction of streets, provision of parks, extension of water and sewer services, and placement of easements for telecommunication, electricity and similar dry utilities. As noted in Criterion A, the Fowler alignment has been designated in multiple City and joint City/County transportation plans as an arterial street. Although presently a gravel rural surface, Fowler is a substantial north-south link in the long range transportation network with a long term width of 110 feet planned for the right of way. With or without this proposed zoning amendment the street will change to an urban paved street. Development of any urban zoning or more intensive County zoning district will require changes to the street to the degree demonstrated as necessary during review of the development. As noted above, the placement of a zoning district does not grant entitlement to construct. 26 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 16 of 31 The site is located within the Cattail Creek drainage basin and Meadow Creek sewer outfall service area. Both have capacity to service additional development. Water mains are located in Kurk Drive and S. 30th Avenue and can be extended to provide the required looped water service. Responsibility to make those connections lies with the developer. The site is adjacent to Fowler Avenue, an arterial street. Kurk Drive, a paved City street with sidewalks on the south side, connects to the property at the east side. Materials provided with the application indicate adequate capacity in water, sewer, and major transportation services to support the potential intensity of the R-5 zone. Review of future development will further verify adequate capacity is present and all needed connections can be provided before any construction may begin. Division 38.420 and Section 38.520.060 require dedication of parks and on-site open spaces to meet needs of residents. The associated annexation will partially address required compliance with City standards. Dedication of right of way for arterials streets is part of the annexation process as is agreement to follow the City’s development standards. With future development proposals, the applicant must demonstrate not just possible but actual street networks and utility connections existing or to be constructed to support the intensity of development proposed. See also Criterion F regarding transportation. The criterion is met. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Yes. This criterion is not about individual preferences for a given degree of “elbow room” but about preservation of public health. The R-5 district includes setbacks from property lines adequate to meet this standard. The form and intensity standards, Division 38.320, require minimum separation from property lines, limits building heights, limits lot coverage with buildings, and maximum volume of buildings on a site. Section 38.520.030 requires building placement to ensure access to light and air. Division 38.420 and Section 38.520.060 require dedication of parks and on-site open spaces to meet needs of residents. The standards provide a reasonable provision of adequate light and air. In addition to the zoning standards, adopted building codes contain more detailed requirements for air circulation, window placement, and building separation that further ensure the intent of this criterion is satisfied. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Yes. All development permitted under the R-5 (or any other municipal zoning district) will result in increased trips along streets, sidewalks, and trails compared to the existing condition of one home on the 20 acre project site. The recommended terms of annexation and City’s development approval processes, for example requirements for easements, the waiver of the right to protect special improvement districts related to transportation, and construction of future roads are expected to sufficiently address impacted transportation systems as a result of the map amendment. 27 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 17 of 31 The City conducts routine transportation monitoring, modeling, and planning to understand existing conditions and future needs of the transportation system. The 2017 Transportation Master Plan is the most recent transportation plan. Figure 2.5, Existing Major Street Network, shows Fowler Avenue as an arterial street, Blackwood Road, S. 27th Avenue, and Graf Street as collectors. The Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2007 Update, Gallatin County’s adopted transportation plan for this same area, shows the same street classifications on Figure 2.2. These four streets will provide the primary collector and arterial access to the site over time. Local streets will link the larger arterial and collectors. Both documents show extensions of Graf Street to Fowler as future expansions of the road network. Further capacity expansion to the transportation network, such as upgrading the condition of Fowler Avenue, improving and connecting Blackwood to S. 19th and signalization of the intersection as expected in the future as the Transportation Master Plan is implemented, will mitigate impact on the larger transportation network. Not all of these expansions will be the responsibility of individual projects. Fowler Avenue is currently a rural standard unpaved road. Development of the site will require development of additional street capacity. Exact routing and character of the improvements is not known at this time. They will be identified during development review when a specific construction proposal is made and impacts can be more accurately identified. Anticipated street capacity for various classes of streets is shown in Table 2.7 of the Transportation Master Plan and discussed in Section 2.4.1 of the same document. Future development of this property provides opportunity to expand the pedestrian network through installation of sidewalks such as a new E-W link connecting Fowler Avenue to the sidewalk network along an extension of Kurk Drive. As there are no existing pedestrian or bicycle facilities along this section of Fowler, the future extension of Kurk will provide a substantial shortening of the travel distance from the west to reach trails, sidewalks, and parks. Bike and pedestrian travel is much more sensitive to distance than motor vehicle travel. Sidewalk installation is a minimum development standard under Chapter 38. This expands and improves the non-motorized transportation system. Figure 2.10 of the Transportation Master Plan visually illustrates the Census and American Community Survey data that those living in the census tract including this property commute to work 35% of the time by foot, bike, or transit. This is the 2nd highest rate in the City area. Given the location of the project site Staff expects that the non-motorized work trip will be less than the 35%. However, with the extension of Kurk Drive provides a continuous street connection from the far west of the subject property to the collector and arterial network that would support walking and biking to major destinations like MSU. Non-work travel data is not available from the Census. The City has established minimum standards applicable to development to limit block length, ensure trail and sidewalk connections, and provide streets adequate to carry traffic projected from development. These standards are not applied at the time of the ZMA but will be 28 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 18 of 31 implemented during the subdivision and site plan processes required before any construction may begin. See also Criterion D. On page 74-75 of the BCP 2020 in the discussion of application of the zoning criteria it says: “Development creates or funds many of the City’s local streets, intersection upgrades, and trails. Therefore, although a text or map amendment may allow more intense development than before, compliance with the adopted Plans and standards will provide adequate capacity to offset that increase.” As the zoning designation itself does not change traffic flow or transportation demand, and the compliance of future development with adopted standards will offset impacts from development, Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Yes. Individuals may have widely varying opinions about what constitutes compatibility. Compatible development and Compatible land use are defined in Article 38.7 BMC to establish a common reference for consideration of this criterion and application of development standards. They are defined as: “Compatible development. The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use. Compatible land use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials.” As noted in the definition of Compatible development, there are many elements that contributed to compatibility. The final sentence of the definition deserves emphasis “Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” Compatible development can be different than what is already in place. The City has adopted a variety of standards to implement compatibility. The proposed R-5 district is a predominantly residential district. The allowed uses for residential districts are set in 38.310.030. A review of Table 38.310.030.A - Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts, shows only two differences between the R-3 and R-5 zoning districts. A review of Table 38.310.030.B – Permitted accessory and 29 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 19 of 31 non-residential uses in residential zoning districts shows three differences and all of those differences are restricted in size and configuration to retain compatibility with the primarily residential uses in the zoning district. The form and intensity standards for residential districts are in 38.320.030. There are more differences between R-3 and R-5 in this portion of the development standards than in the authorized uses section. Development may take many forms in either zoning district. The more intensive development elements allowed in the R-5 district are subject to additional development standards established in Article 38.5, Project Design, of the municipal code. These standards address both site and building design to enable differing uses and scales of development to be meet the definition of compatible in the municipal code and presented above. “Sec. 38.500.010. - Purpose. This article (38.5) implements the Bozeman's growth policy. Overall, this article: A. Provides clear objectives for those embarking on the planning and design of development projects in Bozeman; B. Preserves and protects the public health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Bozeman; C. Ensures that new commercial and multi-household development is of high quality and beneficially contributes to Bozeman's character; D. Ensures that new developments within existing neighborhoods are compatible with, and enhance the character of Bozeman's neighborhoods; E. Promotes an increase in walking and bicycling throughout the City; F. Enhances the livability of Bozeman's residential developments; G. Maintains and enhances property values within Bozeman.” The proposed amendment is associated with an annexation creating an incremental increase in the size of the City. As discussed in Criterion A above, both the City’s and County’s growth policy expect this area to transition from rural to urban development. The unannexed areas adjacent to this property are agricultural or detached homes on an individual large lot in conformance with the Gallatin County AS zoning. There is considerable difference in the intensity of development allowed between the AS and R-5 districts. The primary uses in the R-5 district are residential. Primary uses in the AS district are residential and agricultural. Residential uses are planned for the entire area as described in Criterion A. Therefore, the uses are expected to be compatible. Compatible land uses, as defined above, are those that can exist in harmony and do not cause physical hazards. They do not have to be identical or similar in size or scale to be compatible. Examples of development standards applied to future development to support compatibility are constraint and treatment of stormwater runoff and lighting required to be dark sky compliant and not trespass on adjacent property. 30 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 20 of 31 The City Commission has adopted standards to control development impacts and support compatibility. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s approach. “What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” Staff concludes that although the R-5 is different than the surrounding zoning it is compatible and is urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Criteria A & H. H. Character of the district. Yes. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes [promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.” Emphasis added. This proposal amends the zoning map and not the text. Therefore, no element of this amendment modifies the standards of any zoning district. The character of the districts as created by those standards remains unaltered. Even though the criterion is most applicable to text amendments it still must be applied to consideration of zoning map amendments. As noted above, the City Commission has discretion within the limits of the State established criteria in considering the location and geographical extents of a zoning district. Implementation of zoning must also be in accordance with the adopted growth policy. As noted in Criterion A the City policy calls for a diverse land use pattern. See discussion in Criterion A. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property and subsequent development will alter the existing character of the subject property; which is a rural individual home with accessory buildings. Likewise, development under any municipal zoning district will be visually different from adjacent unannexed property. This is true even if both are used for similar types of housing due to the differences between municipal and county zoning. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it provides a structured method to consider changes to the character. The BCP 2020 notes, 31 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 21 of 31 “…when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” See Criterion A above for discussion about the application and growth policy. The City has defined compatible development as: “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a zoning district. To date, the City of Bozeman has not defined a specific area outside of the area itself to be rezoned for consideration of this criterion. A review of the existing uses within a quarter mile radius of the amendment site shows two zoning districts. One, R-3, is a municipal district and allows a wide variety of housing types including detached homes, townhomes, and other forms of attached homes, as well as various institutional and light commercial uses. The second, A-S, is a county zoning district focused on low density residential and preservation of agricultural operation until it transitions to urban development. See discussion under Criterion A above. Active uses within a quarter mile include parks, detached individual homes, and agricultural fields. This is a small selection of the potential uses allowed in the existing zoning districts. Single homes and townhomes are beginning construction in the nearby Gran Cielo subdivision. The majority of the area within a quarter mile is undeveloped and remains as fields. In the developed areas, zoned as R-3, single household residences are the most commonly constructed buildings. Looking at a broader area as shown in the maps in Section 1, all of the municipally zoned areas west of 19th are in the upper range of zoning district intensity. This is consistent with the City’s previous and current growth policy and infrastructure planning. There is an application for rezoning just south of the Grace Bible Church which is just beginning the review process. The application proposes to rezone a portion of a previously approved site plan from R-O to R-5. The character of the larger area is in process of change with multiple large developments now under construction or in review. This is illustrated by this excerpt from the Community 32 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 22 of 31 Development Viewer. All colored or striped shaded areas are in some stage of review and development. This application is the green shaded rectangle in the lower left of the image. The majority of the area adjacent to the site is agricultural and the character of the area is in transition from rural to urban, as described in Criterion A. Therefore, the character is not fully defined, and is suitable to add additional uses. The City, as shown by an examination of the zoning map and authorized uses in all zoning districts, has striven to encourage a diverse development pattern and avoid large areas of single use development. This is further supported by the statement in the description of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category, “Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged.” No size is specified for what is a large area. Therefore, when considering the character of an area it is expected that there will be diversity of development types. This diversity is also shown on the zoning maps in Section 1. Table 4 of the BCP 2020, see Criterion A above, identifies the implementing zoning districts of the Urban Neighborhood future land use category. That category allows for zoning districts that authorize a wide range of possible future development. There are no zoning districts which 33 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 23 of 31 are limited to only one type of development. All zoning districts implementing the Urban Neighborhood category provide for a range of housing types, institutions, and commercial activities. The expansiveness and intensity allowed varies between districts. The proposed R- 5 has the potential for limited subordinate commercial services on the site but does not require them. Page 77 of the BCP 2020 describing review of zoning map amendments states “When evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their intensions.” When evaluating compatibility between zoning districts, Staff considers the full range of allowable uses, not only what is built at the moment or proposed by a specific project. As discussed under Criterion G, the R-5 zoning district and the adjacent R-3 zoning district are both residential in nature and are more similar than different in uses and standards. Development more intensive than that allowed in the R-3 district, such as an apartment building, is subject to the standards of Article 38.5. Article 38.5 imposes a variety of standards on site and building design. The present development under R-3 near to the requested amendment is developed at the low end of the allowed intensity for the R-3 zoning district. A decision by one owner to use less than the full allowance for development does not limit or restrict another owner from choosing differently. There is a public park along the eastern boundary of the area proposed for zoning. The nearest home to the property line of the area to be zoned is 240 feet away. This separation provides a substantial separation and is sufficient to mitigate any impacts from a different zoning district as described in Criterion G. There is a much larger difference between the proposed R-5 and the adjacent unannexed properties. To the west, the right of way for Fowler Avenue provides a substantial separation from the R-5 adequate to avoid negative impacts. The extension of Kurk Drive with development will provide a separation from the northern adjacent property. As described on page 77 of the BCP 2020, a local street is considered an adequate separation between uses when combined with the City’s development standards even for substantially different districts. Therefore, for properties to the west, north, and east the character of the district is adequately addressed. The greatest difference in character is between the R-5 and the AS zoned property to the south. The property to the south has two detached homes on the 10 acre tract. There is no existing street to the east to extend and create a transition between properties. There is no existing separation between the two properties. The property to the south is, as is the tract proposed to be zoned, in an area which is planned to transition to urban uses as discussed in Criterion A. No time frame for this transition is specified. The change will not occur until the property owner chooses to develop the property. In the meantime, there is a substantial difference between the intensity of development on the two properties even though both are zoning districts with primarily residential uses. Should a street or similar separator be placed along 34 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 24 of 31 the southern boundary of the property being rezoned that will have the same separating/buffering effect as for the properties to the west and north discussed above. Evaluation of this situation is guided by the growth policy. On page 76 of the BCP 2020 under discussion of application of this zoning criteria is says: “Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance.” The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development in R-5 to be compatible with adjacent development and uphold the residential character in an area where R-5 is applied. The following excerpt from the BCP 2020, page 75 describes the City’s approach. “What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. … The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed.” The standards adopted by the City prevent physically dangerous spillover effects. An example is the capture, treatment and discharge controls from additional stormwater runoff as additional impervious surfaces are built. Required setbacks from property lines, landscaping requirements, and similar site and building standards address character and compatibility. These and other standards carry out the intent and purpose of the City’s land development standards in Chapter 38 of the municipal code. Sec. 38.100.040. - Intent and purpose of chapter. A. The intent of this unified development chapter is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare; to recognize and balance the various rights and responsibilities relating to land ownership, use, and development identified in the United States and State of 35 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 25 of 31 Montana constitutions, and statutory and common law; to implement the city's adopted growth policy; and to meet the requirements of state law. Zoning does not prohibit change but provides a structure within which change can occur. Such changes include modifications to both the text and zoning map. Such amendments are authorized in the zoning enabling act for municipalities. Landowners have both property rights and responsibilities. The City has adopted development standards to ensure that responsibilities are met while landowners exercise their property rights. The City has not chosen, and is not required, to adopt standards for all situations and issues, for example, addressing preservation of view sheds or extra separation of buildings from unannexed property. Theme 7 of the BCP 2020 includes this statement: “RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards.” This objective describes the situation now under review. The City is expanding outwards by annexation. Gallatin County has identified this area as a growth area in its land use planning documents. There will be a distinct edge between the AS and R-5 zoning districts with different intensity of residential uses. Staff concludes that although the R-5 is different than the surrounding zoning it is compatible and is urban growth as called for in the growth policy. See also discussion for Criteria A & G. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-5 district. Therefore the impact of the amendment is limited to this application site. The property is generally flat. A watercourse crosses the property from north to south. Groundwater in the area is shallow and potentially at hazard from onsite sewage treatment. The property is within the City’s planning area for land use and utility extensions. There is frontage on Fowler Avenue, an arterial street. Municipal utilities and emergency services can be extended to the area. The site is capable of supporting a more intensive district in the range of zoning districts. These features are not unusual for properties adjacent to the City. The described features support annexation and development within the City. There are not sufficient distinctive characteristics of the property to make a positive or negative findings for this criteria specific to an individual zoning district. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Yes. The proposed amendment does not modify the existing standards of the R-5 district. Therefore the impact of the amendment is limited to this application site and not other R-5 zoned property. The property has one detached home and associated outbuildings on it. The owner of the property is the applicant. The R-5 zoning district will have no negative effect on the value of buildings within the amendment boundary. 36 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 26 of 31 As discussed under Criterion H, property to the west, north, and east has or will have separation from future development on the site. As discussed under Criterion A, G, and H, placement of the R-5 district is consistent with the planned use and long term character of the area. Any new structures at the site will be required to meet setback and other protective requirements set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code, which will alleviate potential negative impacts to the value of surrounding buildings and properties. As described in earlier criteria, the proposed zoning is compatible with existing buildings on adjacent properties and does not create any new situations not in compliance with municipal code. Therefore, this criterion is met. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Yes. As discussed in Criteria A above, this property has been planned for urban residential uses for many years. The proposed R-5 district is a primarily residential district. The property is adjacent to the City, within the municipal services area, and can be annexed. The property is in an area of high groundwater where septic systems are a possible hazard to groundwater. Spot Zoning Criteria Rezoning may, in certain factual circumstances, constitute impermissible “spot zoning.” The issue of whether a rezoning constitutes spot zoning was discussed by the Montana Supreme Court in Plains Grains LP v. Board of County Comm’rs of Cascade County and Little v. Bd. Of County Comm’rs, in which the Court determined that the presence of the following three conditions generally will indicate that a given situation constitutes spot zoning, regardless of variations in factual scenarios. 1. Is the proposed use significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area? No. This criterion includes the modifier ‘significantly.’ It is not prohibited to have uses that are different. To be a Yes answer, the reviewer must demonstrate a ‘significant difference.’ When evaluating this criterion the entire range of uses authorized in a district is evaluated, not just what has been built. The R-5 district is primarily for homes as established in 38.310.030. The shape and configuration of homes may vary but remain homes. As discussed in several criteria above, the surrounding area is already developed or planned for urban residential development. A review of Table 38.310.030.A - Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts, shows only two differences between the adjacent R-3 and proposed R-5 zoning districts. A review of Table 38.310.030.B – Permitted accessory and non-residential uses in residential zoning districts shows three differences and all of those differences are restricted in size and configuration to retain compatibility with the primarily residential uses in the zoning district. Thus 35 of the 40 authorized uses are shared 37 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 27 of 31 between the two districts. Such a high degree of similarity does not support a finding of “significantly different.” Bozeman has deliberately developed a zoning system that includes districts with diverse uses and opportunities. The City deliberately chooses to encourage diverse development and avoid large areas of the same zoning. As noted in Criterion A, this diversity of development approach is supported in the growth policy. As shown in the large scale vicinity map in Section 1 of this report, R-5 has been placed adjacent to other unannexed property and across the street from the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. This is consistent with the legislative discretion authorized in 76-2-302, MCA and cited in the discussion under Criterion H. As discussed in Criteria A, G, and H, the area proposed for zoning change is in a transitional area and changing over time from rural to urban. The implementing zoning districts for the Urban Neighborhood future land use category in the BCP 2020 allow both residential and non-residential uses. Some implementing zoning districts, such as B-1 are primarily business oriented. The R-5 is dominantly a residential district. Future development of the site in compliance with the proposed R-5 designation provides for predominantly residential development which includes a range of uses compatible with the most common residential land uses in the area. As described in Criterion H and others above, the uses authorized in the R-5 are similar to the urban land uses in the area. This criterion only looks at use. It does not consider similarity or difference in other standards related to development such as height, separation from property lines, etc. There are more differences between R-5 and the unannexed adjacent property. The prevailing, or most frequent, use measured by area adjacent to the subject property is agriculture. This is not surprising as this application is occurring in conjunction with annexation of property on the edge of the City. Any municipal zoning district will have differences from the rural zoning established by Gallatin County in this area. The annexation is an incremental expansion of the City, in an area planned by both Gallatin County and the City of Bozeman for such expansion, and the change in zoning is inherent with the growth of the City. Although there are differences between the rural and urban zoning at this time it is the intention of the zoning authority for the use of land to change as shown in the Criterion A analysis above. Therefore, staff finds that this criterion is not met. 2. Is the area requested for the rezone rather small in terms of the number of separate landowners benefited from the proposed change? Yes. The application is submitted by one landowner in conjunction with annexation of the single 20 acre property. Although the City supports multiparty annexation applications, landowner annexation of single properties are the most frequent annexations. As described in Criterion A above, the amendment advances the overall policies of the BCP 2020, the City’s adopted growth policy, and the growth policy and neighborhood plans for Gallatin County. As the application advances the growth policies there are benefits to the larger 38 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 28 of 31 community from the amendment. Although there is generalized benefit to the community, the number of direct beneficiaries is small. 3. Would the change be in the nature of “special legislation” designed to benefit only one or a few landowners at the expense of the surrounding landowners or the general public? No. While the applicant/landowner will directly benefit from the proposed zone map amendment, the proposed amendment is not at the expense of surrounding landowners or the general public. As discussed above in the various review criteria above, no substantial negative impacts are identified due to this amendment. When looking at the City as a whole, Bozeman is in need of additional housing to meet increased demand for a variety of housing options. The proposed R-5 would allow for more housing in a growing area of the City, which benefits the general public. Additional parks and transportation links will provide benefits to the community at large. As discussed in Criterion A, the application is consistent both the City’s and the County’s growth policy. The growth policy is the overall land use policy for the community. Consistency with the growth policy demonstrates benefit to the general public. As discussed under Criterion D, the City’s development standards will require the applicant to provide the needed infrastructure to support any proposed development prior to construction of homes. Concurrency and adequacy of infrastructure remove most potential injury to others. As discussed in Criterion H, the application is different but consistent with the existing and developing character of the area. Therefore, the amendment does not benefit the landowner at the expense of others. Development of the site in any manner will create additional demand for services and change the character of the site as a large lot single home. A change to an urban district does not inherently injure the surrounding landowners. PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s) of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i) contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the 39 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 29 of 31 protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. APPENDIX A - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on December 27, 2020, January 3, 2021, and will be published on January 24, 2021. The site was posted in two locations and notices mailed by the applicant as required by 38.220 and the required confirmation provided to the Planning Office. Notice was or will be provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to any public hearing. As of the writing of this report on January 6, 2021, four written comments received on this application. Written comments are available for review at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/fol/229536/Row1.aspx. As comments are received they will be added to this folder and be available to the public, Zoning Commission, and City Commission. APPENDIX B - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Urban Neighborhood” in the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. 1. URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car. 40 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 30 of 31 Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of “R-5” (Residential mixed-use high density District) in association with the annexation of the property. The intent of the R-5 District is set in 38.300.100: F. Residential mixed-use high density district (R-5). The intent of the R-5 residential mixed-use high density district is to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of compatible housing types and residentially supportive commercial uses in a geographically compact, walkable area to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. These purposes are accomplished by: 1. Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 2. Allowing offices and small scale retail and restaurants as secondary uses provided special standards are met. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services. APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner: /Applicant: Yellowstone Investment Group, Professional LLC, 40 Boxcar Lane, Bozeman MT 59718 Representative: Derek Williams, 40 Boxcar Lane, Bozeman MT 59718 Report By: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager FISCAL EFFECTS No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by this Annexation or Zone Map Amendment. Future development will incur costs and generate review according to standard City practices. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. 41 Staff Report for the 20112 Buffalo Run Zone Map Amendment Page 31 of 31 Application materials Public comments are at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/fol/229536/Row1.aspx 42 VICINITY MAP KURK DRIVE FOWLER LANE BLACKWOOD ROAD S 27TH AVENUE BOZEMAN CITY LIMITS S 30TH AVENUE W GRAF STREET STUCKY ROAD SITE GALLATIN COUNTY MEADOW CREEK GENESIS BUSINESS PARK h:\vogel\bozeman\cad\dwg\bozeman- vicinty map 2019 11 01.dwg BUFFALO RUN VICINITY MAP SCALE: 1"= November 04, 2019 0 1000' 500 1000 475 W. 12th Avenue - Suite E Denver, Colorado 80204-3688 (303) 893-4288 43 44 45 46 47 N89°51'57"E 1331.45' S89°52'06"W 1330.04' S0°01'33"W 665.57' S89°52'06"W 30.00' N89°51'57"E 30.00' N0°05'46"W 665.51' S0°05'46"E 665.51' BRAWNER DIANE L. REV TRUST DATED 07/23/14 C.O.S. 2074 MEADOW CREEK PARTNERS LLC MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION PHASE 1 NEESE URSULA N 1 2 S 1 2 SW 1 4 SW 1 4 SECTION 23 T2S R5E KOUNTZ DAYLE H. MARITAL TRUST S 1 2 SE 1 4 SECTION 22 T2S R5E BRAWNER DIANE L. REV TRUST DATED 07/23/14 C.O.S 1861 N1 2 SW 1 4 SW 1 4 SECTION 23 T2S R5E GALLTIN COUNTY, MT 20.33 ACRES CHRISTENSEN JON C & ELIZABETH R S 1 2 S 1 2 SW 1 4 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT November 04, 2020 49 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT SHEET INDEX SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - COVER SHEET PAGE 7-11: ANNX FORM: GOALS AND POLICIES ________________________________________ PAGE 12: PROJECT TEAM PAGE 13-14: PROJECT OVERVIEW PAGE 15: CONTEXT PLAN AND EXISTING CONDITIONS PAGE 16: URBAN FRAMEWORK PLAN PAGE 17: CONNECTIVITY PLAN PAGE 18: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN PAGE 19-23: NARRATIVE CONTINUED BUFFALO RUN EXHIBITS - COVER SHEET PAGE 24: CONTEXT PLAN PAGE 25: URBAN FRAMEWORK PLAN PAGE 26: CONNECTIVITY PLAN PAGE 27: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN PAGE 28: EXISTING LAND USE PLAN PAGE 29: EXISTING ZONING MAP PAGE 30: ZONING PATTERN ANALYSIS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION - COVER SHEET PAGE 31-42: PLATTING CERTIFICATE PAGE 43-46: ARTICLE OF ORGANIZATION PAGE 47: CERTIFICATE OF FACT OF GOOD STANDING PAGE 48-61: DEED PAGE 62-63: NOTARY DOCUMENTS PAGE 64: NOTICING CHECKLIST - N1 FORM PAGE 65-66: CVA (COVID FORM) PAGE 67-68: ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS 50 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT SHEET INDEX- SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS ________________________________ PAGE 7-11: ANNX FORM GOALS AND POLICIES 51 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com SECTION ONE: GOALS 1. The City of Bozeman encourages annexations of land contiguous to the City. The Buffalo Run Parcel is located contiguous to the City. The Meadow Creek subdivision located to the east of the parcel and has been annexed to the City of Bozeman. 2. The City encourages all areas that are totally surrounded by the City to annex. The Buffalo Run parcels is not surrounded by the City, it is located within the future land use area map and is adjacent to the existing City boundary. 3. The City encourages all properties currently contracting with the City for City services such as water, sanitary sewer, and/or fire protection to annex. The Buffalo Run parcel currently utilizes well and septic with the intent to contract with the City for water, sanitary sewer and fire protection services upon annexation. 4. The City of Bozeman requires annexation of all land proposed for development lying within the existing and planned service area of the municipal water and sewer systems as depicted in their respective facility plans, any land proposed for development that proposes to utilize municipal water or sewer systems. City water and sewer is located north and east of the parcel within the existing Meadow Creek subdivision. The intent is to extend the existing utilities as required to serve the Buffalo Run project. A comprehensive storm water system will also be implemented. The Buffalo Run infrastructure improvements will also include installing a sanitary sewer mainline in Fowler Lane that will extend north to Stucky Road. 5. The City encourages annexations within the urban area identified on the future land use map in the current Bozeman Growth Policy. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the subject property as Residential. Under the growth policy’s description of the residential future land use category it states “High density residential areas should be established near commercial centers to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities to persons without requiring the use of an automobile. Implementation of this category by residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in proximity to commercial centers.” Buffalo Run is located adjacent to Fowler Lane which is proposed as a minor arterial. The Fowler Lane and Blackwood Rd intersection is located just south of the Buffalo Run parcel. It is anticipated that this intersection will be developed in the future to include residential/commercial centers and higher density residential. Enclosed is an exhibit (see Potential Zoning Pattern Analysis) illustrating a potential land use and zoning pattern for the Fowler Lane, Blackwood Rd and Stucky Rd. The proposed R-5 would be consistent with this growth pattern. 6. The City of Bozeman encourages annexations to make the City boundaries more regular rather than creating irregular extensions which leave unannexed gaps between annexed areas or islands of annexed or unannexed land. The annexation will result into in a regular shaped boundary that is contiguous to the existing City boundary. PAGE 7 52 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �and �lanning  �andscape �rchitect�re  �eal �state �easi�ility  �e�elop�ent �ons�lting 7. �he �ity o� �o�e�an enco�rages anne�ations which will enhance the e�isting tra��ic circ�lation syste� or pro�ide �or circ�lation syste�s that do not e�ist at the present ti�e. �s o�tlined a�o�e and ill�strated on the enclosed connecti�ity e�hi�it �see �onnecti�ity �lan�� the intent is to e�tend the street grid networ�. �his grid pattern will pro�ide �or additional connections incl�ding the ��t�re e�tension o� ��r� �ri�e to �owler �ane. ��pro�e�ents will also incl�de aligning with �o�th ��st ��en�e and co�pleting the �o�th ��th ��en�e seg�ent that is located within the e�isting ease�ent. ����alo ��n will initially �tili�e ��r� �ri�e and �o�th ��st ��en�e �or access. �hese streets are interconnected with the grid networ� that has �een esta�lished with the �eadow �ree� ���di�ision. �his networ� will pro�ide alternati�e ro�tes and ��rther disperse tra��ic. �s the north and so�th parcels are de�eloped� pro�isions ha�e �een incorporated in the plan to pro�ide additional connections and access alternati�es. �s ill�strated on the �r�an �ra�ewor� plan� ��r� �ri�e is proposed to e�tend to �owler �ane. �his interconnected networ� o� streets and wal�a�le �loc� con�ig�ration will rein�orce a ��lti��odal transportation progra� that will incl�de �icycle� pedestrian� �ehicle� and transit �o�ility alternati�es. �he �ity pre�ers anne�ation o� parcels o� land larger than �i�e ��� acres in si�e ��t will allow anne�ation o� s�aller parcels i� �actors s�ch as topographic li�itations� sanitary disposal needs� �ire access� �aintenance o� p��lic �acilities� etc.� ��sti�y a s�aller anne�ation. �he ����alo ��n parcel is appro�i�ately ��.� acres. 8. �he �ity see�s to o�tain water rights ade��ate �or ��t�re de�elop�ent o� the property with anne�ation. ����alo ��n is willing to trans�er �sa�le water rights. 9. �he �ity o� �o�e�an enco�rages anne�ations �or �ity pro�ision o� clean treated water and sanitary sewer. ����alo ��n is proposed to �e connected to the �ity water and sewer syste�. SECTION TWO: POLICIES 1. �nne�ations ��st incl�de dedication o� all ease�ents �or rights�o��way �or collector and arterial streets� ad�acent local streets� p��lic water� sanitary sewer� or stor� or sewer �ains� and �lass � p��lic trails not within the right o� way �or arterial or collector streets. �nne�ations ��st also incl�de wai�ers o� right to protest the creation o� special or i�pro�e�ent districts necessary to pro�ide the essential ser�ices �or ��t�re de�elop�ent o� the �ity. �he applicant agrees to dedicate the �owler �ane right�o��way re��ired to acco��odate a ��lane collector section. �his right�o��way and ��’ p��lic �tility ease�ent will �e dedicated at the ti�e o� �inal �lat. �he applicant wai�es the right to protest the creation o� special or i�pro�e�ent districts necessary to pro�ide the essential ser�ices �or ��t�re de�elop�ent o� the �ity. 2. �ss�es pertaining to �aster planning and �oning ��st �e addressed prior to or in con��nction with the application �or anne�ation. Bozeman’s Uni�ied �e�elop�ent �ode� ��.���.���� de�ines co�pati�le de�elop�ent as “�he �se o� land and the constr�ction and �se o� str�ct�res which is in har�ony with ad�oining de�elop�ent� e�isting neigh�orhoods� and the goals and o��ecti�es o� the city’s adopted growth policy. �le�ents o� co�pati�le de�elop�ent incl�de� ��t are not li�ited to� �ariety o� architect�ral design� rhyth� o� architect�ral ele�ents� scale� intensity� �aterials� ��ilding siting� lot and ��ilding si�e� ho�rs o� operation� and integration with e�isting co���nity syste�s incl�ding water and sewer ser�ices� nat�ral ele�ents in the area� �otori�ed and non��otori�ed transportation and open spaces and par�s. PAGE 8 53 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �an� ��annin�  �an�sca�e ��c�itect��e  �ea� �state �easi�i�ity  �e�e�o�ment �ons��tin� �om�ati��e �e�e�o�ment �oes not �e��i�e �ni�o�mity o� monotony o� a�c�itect��a� o� site �esi�n� density or use.” �om�ati��e �an� �se is as “A lan� �se ��ic� may �y �i�t�e o� t�e c�a�acte�istics o� its �isce�ni��e o�t�a�� e��ects e�ist in �a�mony �it� an a��oinin� �an� �se o� �i��e�in� c�a�acte�� ���ects o�ten meas��e� to �ete�mine com�ati�i�ity inc���e� ��t a�e not �imite� to noise� o�o�� �i��t an� t�e ��esence o� ��ysica� �aza��s s�c� as com��sti��e or explosive materials.” ��e ��o�t� �o�icy s���o�ts ��o�i�in� a �a�iety o� �o�sin� o�tions nea� se��ices� em��oyments o��o�t�nities� an� t�ans�o�tation o�tions� ��e ��o�ose� ��� amen�ment �i�� ena��e �i��e� �esi�entia� �ensities in an a�ea t�at �ocate� �it�in ��o�imity o� t�e �ontana �tate Uni�e�sity an� t�e ��ac�e �am��s �ocate� to t�e no�t�east� �s note�� t�e c���ent �o�sin� ty�e �it�in t�is ��a��ant is ��ima�i�y sin��e �ami�y �etac�e�� ��o�i�in� a�te�nati�e �o�sin� in t�e a�ea �i�� en�ance t�e �o�sin� o�tions �o� ��at c���ent�y is a m��ti�imensiona� �o���ation� ���an�in� t�e �ea�o� ��ee� �a�� an� ��o�i�in� a��itiona� o�en s�ace� t�ai� connection an� �ec�eationa� o��o�t�nities ���t�e� �ein�o�ces t�e �i�a�i�ity an� sense o� comm�nity� ��eatin� a��itiona� �at�e�in� a�eas a�so ��o�i�es an� �oste�s comm�nity com�ati�i�ity� �s note� a�o�e� t�e ��t��e ��o�t� �atte�n t�at is en�isione� to occ�� a�on� t�e �o��e� �ane co��i�o� an� at t�e inte�section o� B�ac��oo� �� �i�� ���t�e� en�ance com�ati�i�ity� �t is antici�ate� t�at a��itiona� zone c�assi�ications s�c� as ��� an� ��� �i�� �e �ocate� a�on� t�e �o��e� �ane co��i�o�� 3. ��e a���ication �o� anne�ation m�st �e in con�o�mance �it� t�e c���ent Bozeman ��o�t� �o�icy� �� a ��o�t� �o�icy �men�ment is necessa�y to accommo�ate antici�ate� �ses� t�e amen�ment ��ocess m�st �e initiate� �y t�e ��o�e�ty o�ne� an� com��ete� ��io� to any action �o� a���o�a� o� t�e a���ication �o� anne�ation� ��e ��t��e �an� �se ma� in t�e Bozeman �omm�nity ��an ���o�t� �o�icy� �esi�nates t�e s���ect ��o�e�ty as �esi�entia�� Un�e� t�e growth policy’s description o� t�e �esi�entia� ��t��e �an� �se cate�o�y it states “Hi�� �ensity �esi�entia� a�eas s�o��� �e esta��is�e� nea� comme�cia� cente�s to �aci�itate t�e ��o�ision o� se��ices an� em��oyment o��o�t�nities to �e�sons �it�o�t �e��i�in� t�e �se o� an a�tomo�i�e� �m��ementation o� t�is cate�o�y �y �esi�entia� zonin� s�o��� ��o�i�e �o� an� coo��inate intensi�e �esi�entia� �ses in ��o�imity to commercial centers.” B���a�o ��n is �ocate� a��acent to �o��e� �ane ��ic� is ��o�ose� as a mino� a�te�ia�� ��e �o��e� �ane an� B�ac��oo� �� inte�section is �ocate� ��st so�t� o� t�e B���a�o ��n �a�ce�� �t is antici�ate� t�at t�is inte�section �i�� �e �e�e�o�e� in t�e ��t��e to inc���e �esi�entia��comme�cia� cente�s an� �i��e� �ensity �esi�entia�� �nc�ose� is an e��i�it �see �otentia� �onin� �atte�n �na�ysis� i���st�atin� a �otentia� �an� �se an� zonin� �atte�n �o� t�e �o��e� �ane� B�ac��oo� �� an� �t�c�y ��� ��e ��o�ose� ��� �o��� �e consistent �it� t�is ��o�t� �atte�n� � ��o�t� �o�icy �men�ment is not �e��i�e� �it� t�is a���ication� 4. �nitia� zonin� c�assi�ication o� t�e ��o�e�ty to �e anne�e� �i�� �e �ete�mine� �y t�e �ity �ommission� in com��iance �it� t�e Bozeman ��o�t� �o�icy an� ��on a �ecommen�ation o� t�e �ity �onin� �ommission� sim��taneo�s�y �it� �e�ie� o� t�e anne�ation �etition� ��e ��o�ose� ��� zone ma� amen�ment �i�� enco��a�e t�e most a���o��iate �se o� �an� as t�e ��o�t� �o�icy �esi�nates t�e property as “Residential,” which the proposed R�� �esi�nation �i�� im��ement� ��e �ity is in nee� o� a��itiona� �o�sin� to accommo�ate c���ent an� ��o�ecte� �eman� inc���in� �o�sin� �e��i�e� �o� t�e ��ac�e �am��s� �o meet t�is �eman� a �a�iety o� �o�sin� o�tions nea� se��ices� em��oyment cente�s� an� t�ans�o�tation o�tions a�e nee�e�� ��is zone ma� amen�ment �i�� �e�� a���ess t�is nee� �y a��o�in� �o� �i��e� �esi�entia� �ensities� PAGE 9 54 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �and �lanning  �andscape Architecture  Real �state �easi�ility  �evelopment �onsulting �� ���.���.���� �� ���.��������  ��� �est ��th Avenue, �uite �, �enver, �olorado �����  www.vogelassoc.com 5. �he applicant must indicate their pre�erred �oning classi�ication as part o� the annexation petition. �he proposed R�� �one amendment is re�uested. 6. �ees �or annexation processing will �e esta�lished �y the �ity �ommission. �he applicant will pay the re�uired processing �ees. 7. �t is the policy o� the �ity that annexations will not �e approved where unpaved county roads will �e the most commonly used route to gain access to the property unless the landowner proposes a method to provide �or construction o� the road to the City’s street standards. As outlined a�ove and illustrated on the enclosed connectivity exhi�it �see �onnectivity �lan�, the intent is to extend the grid networ� o� streets. �his grid pattern will provide �or additional connections including the extension o� �ur� �rive to �owler �ane and aligning with �outh ��st Avenue that will connect to �eah �ane. �u��alo Run will initially utili�e �ur� �rive and �outh ��st Avenue �or access. �hese streets are interconnected with the grid networ� that has �een esta�lished with the �eadow �ree� �u�division. �his networ� will provide alternative routes and �urther disperse tra��ic. As the north and south parcels are developed, provisions have �een incorporated in the plan to provide additional connections and access alternatives. As illustrated on the ur�an �ramewor� plan, �ur� �rive is proposed to extend to �owler �ane. �his interconnected networ� o� streets and wal�a�le �loc� con�iguration will rein�orce a multi�modal transportation program that will include �icycle, pedestrian, vehicle, and transit mo�ility alternatives. �rior to annexation o� property, the �ity will re�uire the property owner to ac�uire ade�uate and usea�le water rights, or an appropriate �ee in lieu thereo�, in accordance with �ection ��.���.��� o� the municipal code, as amended. �u��alo Run will trans�er usa�le water rights or pay the appropriate �ees. 8. �n�rastructure and emergency services �or an area proposed �or annexation will �e reviewed �or the health, sa�ety and wel�are o� the pu�lic and con�ormance with the City’s adopted facility plans. If the City determines adequate services cannot be provided to ensure pu�lic health, sa�ety and wel�are, the �ity may re�uire the property owner to provide a written plan �or accommodation o� these services, or the �ity may re�ect the petition �or annexation. Additionally, the parcel to �e annexed may only �e provided sanitary sewer service via the applica�le drainage �asin de�ined in the �ity �astewater �ollection �acilities �lan. �t is the intent �or �u��alo Run to �e served �y �ity emergency services, including police and �ire. �xisting water and sanitary sewer lines are located directly east o� the �u��alo Run parcel. 9. �he �ity may re�uire annexation o� any contiguous property �or which city services are re�uested or �or which city services are currently �eing provided. �n addition, any person, �irm, or corporation receiving water or sewer service outside o� the �ity limits is re�uired as a condition o� initiating or continuing such service, to consent to annexation o� the property serviced �y the �ity. �he �ity �anager may enter into an agreement with a property owner �or connection to the City’s sanitary sewer or water system in an emergency conditioned upon the su�mittal �y the property owner o� a petition �or annexation and �iling of a notice of consent to annexation with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder’s Office. The contract for connection to city sewer and�or water must re�uire the property owner to annex or consent to disconnection o� the services. �onnection �or purposes o� o�taining �ity sewer services in an emergency re�uires, when �easi�le as determined �y the �ity, the connection to �ity water services. �ity water and sewer is located north and east o� the parcel. �he intent is to extend the existing utilities as re�uired to serve the �u��alo Run pro�ect. �he �u��alo Run in�rastructure improvements will also include installing a sanitary sewer mainline in �owler �ane that will extend north to �tuc�y Road. PAGE 10 55 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �and �lannin�  �andscape �rchitecture  Real �state �easibility  �evelopment Consultin� �� ���.���.���� �� ���.��������  ��� �est ��th �venue� �uite �� �enver� Colorado �����  www.vo�elassoc.com 10. The annexation application shall be accompanied by mappin� to meet the requirements of the �irector of �ublic �orks. �here an area to be annexed can be entirely described by reference to a certificate of survey or subdivision plat on file with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder. �nnexation and �one map maps are enclosed with this application. 11. The mappin� may be waived by the �irector of �ublic �orks. �n annexation plat and �one amendment map are enclosed with this application. 12. The City will assess system development�impact fees in accordance with �ontana law and Chapter �� �rticle �� �ivision �� �o�eman �unicipal Code. The applicant shall pay applicable and required development fees. 13. �ublic notice requirements� �otice for annexation of property must be coordinated with the required notice for the �one map amendment required with all annexation. The �one map amendment notice must contain the materials required by ��.���.���� ��C. �one �ap �mendment �oticin� has been provided as required by ��.���� ��� is enclosed with this application. 14. �nnexation a�reements must be executed and returned to the City within �� days of distribution of the annexation a�reement by the City� unless another time is specifically identified by the City Commission. �n annexation a�reement will be prepared and executed as outlined above. 15. �hen possible� the use of �art �� annexations is preferred. The �art �� annexation has been noted. 16. �here a road improvement district has been created� the annexation does not repeal the creation of the district. The City will not assume operations of the district until the entirety of the district has been annexed. �ny funds held in trust for the district will be used to benefit the district after transfer to the City. Inclusion within a district does not lessen the obli�ation to participate in �eneral city pro�rams that address the same sub�ect. The �uffalo Run parcel is not currently located within a road improvements district. 17. The City will notify the Gallatin County �lannin� �epartment and �ire �istrict providin� service to the area of applications for annexation. It is acknowled�ed that the Gallatin County �lannin� �epartment and �ire �istrict will be referred to for providin� the respective services. 18. The City will require connection to and use of all City services upon development of annexed properties. The City may establish a fixed time frame for connection to municipal utilities. �pon development� unless otherwise approved by the City� septic systems must be properly abandoned and the development connected to the City sanitary sewer system. �pon development� unless otherwise approved by the City� water wells on the sub�ect property may be used for irri�ation� but any potable uses must be supplied from the City water distribution system and any wells disconnected from structures. The property owner must contact the City �ater and �ewer �uperintendent to verify disconnects of wells and septic systems. It is the intent to connect the �uffalo Run parcel to City water and sewer services. The existin� septic system will be abandoned upon sewer bein� extended and activated. Coordination with the City �ater and �ewer �uperintendent to verify disconnects of wells and septic systems will be completed. PAGE 11 56 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Buffalo Run Project Team The following is an outline of the Buffalo Run project team. Owner/Developer: Buffalo Run Bozeman, LLC 5400 Fowler Lane Bozeman, MT. 59718 Contact: Derek Williams Phone: (303) 887-4045 Email: derek@bridgerdevelop.com Planner and Landscape Architect: Vogel & Associates, LLC 475 W. 12th Avenue, Suite E Denver, CO. 80204 Contact: Jeffrey Vogel, AICP Phone: (303) 893-4288 Email: jvogel@vogelassoc.com Architect: Intrinsik Architecture, Inc. 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT. 59715 Contact: Robert Pertzborn, AIA Phone: (406) 582-8988 Email: rpertzborn@intrinsikarchitecture.com Ivins Design, LLC 7373 E. Ellsworth, Ave Denver, CO. 80209 Contact: Bruce Ivins, AIA Phone: (303) 829-0308 Email: ivinsdesign@comcast.net Civil Engineer and Survey: Morrison-Maierle 2880 Technology Blvd. W Bozeman, MT. 58718 Contact: Matt Ekstrom, PE Phone: (406) 922-6784 Email: mekstrom@m-m.net Legal: Swimley Law 1807 W. Dickerson, Unit B Bozeman, MT. 58718 Contact: Susan B. Swimley Phone: (406) 586-5544 Email: swimley@swimleylaw.com PAGE 12 57 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Project Overview Project Vision Buffalo Run is envisioned to be a residential community that will provide enduring value to the City of Bozeman and the region. A cohesive residential community and urban framework plan that is grounded in a constant set of integrated planning principles. The vision and directives for Buffalo Run were developed and influenced by several factors related to the environment, community and the social considerations within the region. Outlined below are the integrated planning principles that have been incorporated into the program and conceptual master plan. These principles are to serve as a guide for all levels and elements of design, phasing and implementation. The integrated planning principles are as follows. Principle One: Enhance community networks and open space. Principle Two: Identify and sustain green infrastructure. Principle Three: Protect environmental systems. Principle Four: Establish a diversity of housing types. Principle Five: Enhance Community connectivity. The above principles are consistent with City of Bozeman Community Plan principles including establishing cohesive neighborhoods that establishes a sense of place. Other principles include preserving natural amenities and incorporating appropriate urban densities that are consistent with the directives above and the enclosed urban framework plan. Buffalo Run is also envisioned and planned to advance the vision statements, goals and objectives outlined in the Bozeman Strategic Plan and Community Plan. This includes incorporating a diversity of housing to the area as required to support an “Innovative Economy” and “balanced” community. a. Community Quality Goal - 1: “Human Scale and Compatibility - Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed for the human scale and compatibility in which the streets and buildings are properly sized within their context, services and amenities are convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated.” Buffalo Run is planned as a neighborhood that is configured within a development pattern that includes interconnected pedestrian-oriented streets, walkable blocks and a central open space system. Consistent with the City master plan objectives, this interconnected network of streets and walkable block configuration will reinforce a multi-modal transportation program that will include bicycle, pedestrian, vehicle, and transit mobility alternatives. A hierarchy of parks are programed to serve as human-scaled gathering areas. b. Community Quality Objective C-3.2: “Provide for neighborhood focal points to encourage local identity within the community and provide a place for social interaction.” Buffalo Run is configured to include a variety of focal points that will foster community gathering and social interaction. This includes the enlarged Meadow Creek Park, neighborhood greens, and community clubhouse. The central pedestrian street corridor creates a visual and physical connection to the community center, ponds and green space. This central amenity area serves as the focal point of the project. Other architectural elements and landmarks may be incorporated into the respective spaces. PAGE 13 58 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT      c. Community Quality Objective C-3.5: “Integrate a wide variety of open lands, such as parks, trails, squares, greens, playing fields, natural areas, orchards and gardens, greenways, and other outdoor spaces into neighborhoods.” Buffalo Run is planned to include a hierarchy of parks and open space areas that accommodate a variety of active and passive recreation uses. These spaces also serve as community focal points and gathering areas. d. Housing Goal H-1: “Promote an adequate supply of safe, quality housing that is diverse in type, density, cost, and location with an emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and stability.” e. Housing Objective 1.3: “Promote the provision of a wide variety of housing types in a range of costs to meet the diverse residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Rezoning the Buffalo Run parcel to R-5 will allow for a variety of housing to be implemented to accommodate a multi-generational and dimensional population. f. Housing Objective 1.4: “Recognize the role of housing in economic development.” Allowing for a diverse housing program/stock accommodates a more diverse and multi-income population. A reliable and diverse housing program is required to support employment generators including educational facilities. g. Housing Objective 2.1: “Encourage socially and economically diverse neighborhoods.” h. Housing Objective 3.3: “Promote the development of a wide variety of housing types, designs, and costs to meet the wide range of residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Buffalo Run and proposed zoning has the ability to provide much needed alternative housing choices. PAGE 14 59 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Context Plan and Existing Conditions Buffalo Run is located on approximately 20.3 acres that is located within unincorporated Gallatin County. Enclosed is a context plan for your reference. This 20.3 acres is located within the urban services boundary, on the southwest edge of the City of Bozeman. It is within proximity of other residential communities including the Meadow Creek subdivision that is located to the east. Other non-residential and educational uses within proximity of the Buffalo Run project include Montana State University and the Oracle Campus located to the northeast. The site is located within an Opportunity Zone which are areas designated for growth and development. The property is defined by Fowler Lane on the west and the Meadow Creek subdivision/park on the east. Undeveloped parcels currently utilized for agriculture are located on the north and south side of the Buffalo Run parcel. The Buffalo Run parcel is currently zoned Agricultural Suburban within the County providing for predominantly agricultural land uses. Parcels located on the north, west and south are zoned Agriculture Suburban. This parcel has historically been utilized for agricultural purposes. A single-family detached home and accessory structure is located within the northwest corner of the site. The Meadow Creek subdivision is located within the City of Bozeman and is zoned R3. Existing site characteristics includes gentle topography that includes expansive vistas to the surrounding mountains. Vegetation consists of predominantly grasslands and small clusters of trees that are located adjacent to the existing single-family home. An irrigation ditch transcends west to the central north section of the property. The irrigation ditch connects to a terraced pond system that is located within the northwest quadrant of the site. It has been confirmed that this irrigation system is not a designated water course. Currently access to the site is provided via Fowler Lane that is an unpaved road. Fowler Lane is designated as a future minor arterial. Kurk Drive is a paved street that also provides access at the northeast corner of the site. The project intends to make Kurk Drive the primary access point along with connections to 31st drive upon approval. Existing utilities on the site include electric and water via a well that are utilized for the existing home. Existing City water and sewer mains are located east of the parcel within the Meadow Creek subdivision. PAGE 15 60 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Urban Framework Plan This proposed amendment and urban framework plan promotes public health, safety and the general welfare of the community. A significant component of the plan includes establishing an urban framework plan that reinforces community goals with regards to establishing land uses and housing that will provide for a sustainable and innovative community. Planning objectives also include enhancing regional and community connectivity for pedestrian and transportation vehicles including mass transit. The framework also provides for additional parks and open space including enlarging the existing Meadow Creek park. PAGE 16 61 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Connectivity The proposed zoning amendment and urban framework plan will provide for fire and other emergency vehicles. This proposed amendment and urban framework work plan provides two points of access as outlined in the narrative below. The enclosed connectivity plan illustrates proposed vehicle and pedestrian connections. This includes utilizing open space, parks and pedestrian oriented streets to provide connections within and adjacent to the Buffalo Run project. Streets are configured to reinforce the urban grid that is envisioned for Bozeman and the region. This includes integrating and expanding the grid that has been established at the Meadow Creek subdivision. The street configuration is aligned to extend Kurk Drive to Fowler Lane and the adjacent street network including proposed north/south connections that may be constructed in the future. As illustrated, the grid and second point of access is to be provided via South 31st Ave to Meah Lane. Other improvements include completing the South 27th Avenue segment that is located within the existing easement. A segment of Blackwood Drive will also be completed which will also increase connectivity to the City arterial and collector system. This street network provides for walkable blocks that will provide alternative pedestrian and vehicle routes. The grid will further disperse traffic and provides a safe corridor for pedestrians. As illustrated on the enclosed exhibits, both public and private pedestrian-oriented streets are configured to connect with the open space and park system. The intent is to provide community and regional users alternative routes to access the park and trail amenities. This network will further be enhanced as the adjacent framework is developed in the future. The framework plan and park also propose extending the Meadow Trail to the west to the future Fowler Lane minor arterial. PAGE 17 62 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Parks and Open Space The Buffalo Run framework plan incorporates a comprehensive parks and open space system. As illustrated on the parks and open space plan, there is a hierarchy of spaces that have been configured within the plan. This open space program includes active play areas, passive open space and trail corridors. Pedestrian oriented streets and trail corridors connect parks and open space areas. As illustrated on the attached, an additional 2.6 acres of the parkland is to be dedicated to the existing Meadow Creek Park exceeding the required public land dedication. In addition to increasing the size of the park, additional improvements to the park are also proposed that may include sport courts, a pavilion and the relocation/enlargement of the existing neighborhood playground. Specific elements including the playground is to be located to provide access and use for both the Buffalo Run and Meadow Creek neighborhood. Upon further review with the parks department, specific program elements to be included in the park will be finalized. Located on the west side of the Buffalo Run neighborhood is existing seasonal terraced pond system that is being utilized to serve as a passive park area that will include a looped trail system, benches and other site elements. The clubhouse will serve as a community gathering space and may include a multi-purpose room, fitness facility and pool. Two neighborhood greens are located within the central portion of the community and adjacent to the proposed north/south 30’ trail corridor. These neighborhood greens are designed to accommodate shade structures, grills and other community amenities. The 30’ trail corridor provides a pedestrian connection to the adjacent north and south parcels that also includes access to the extended Meadow Trail. PAGE 18 63 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT      Infrastructure, Utilities and Public Facilities Land Use and Zoning “ ” ’ Annexation PAGE 19 64 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT      Zone Map Amendment Approval Criteria A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. growth policy’s descriptio “High imity to commercial centers.” B. Security, safety from fire and other dangers. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. require site plan review and compliance with the City’s Unified PAGE 20 65 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �and �lanning  �andscape �rchitecture  �eal �state �easi�ility  �evelopment Consulting �� ���.���.���� �� ���.��������  ��� �est ��th �venue� �uite �� �enver� Colorado �����  www.vogelassoc.com D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. �uffalo �un includes a street networ� that will enhance regional and community connectivity. �his networ� includes e�tensions to the e�isting street system and to �owler �ane. �he proposed networ� will e�pand to the City arterial and collector system. �ncorporating a gridded configuration of streets provide alternative routes and dispersed traffic. City water and sewer is located east of the parcel. �he intent is to e�tend the e�isting utilities as required to serve the �uffalo �un pro�ect. �he �uffalo �un infrastructure improvements will also include installing a sanitary sewer mainline in �owler �ane that will e�tend north to �tuc�y �oad. � comprehensive storm water system will also �e implemented. �he �uffalo �un pro�ect proposed e�panding the �eadow Cree� �ar� and incorporating additional recreational facilities. �ther pu�lic open space and par�s are included in the plan providing for a variety of gathering and recreation alternatives. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. �epending on the pitch of the roof� the ��� district allows for �uilding heights that are �� feet higher than what is allowed in the ��� district. �his additional height allows for more fle�i�ility and articulation in the architectural design including roof forms. �dditional �uilding height allows for taller interior floor to floor dimensions and larger e�panses of windows and�or glass doors. �his not only provides more natural light into the units �ut increases the �uilding facade transparency and architectural interest. �he ��� affords more fle�i�ility to design more meaningful outdoor spaces including roof dec�s� which will �e dispersed amongst the unit types. �atural and healthier air flow is easier to achieve with taller interior spaces. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. �s outlined a�ove and illustrated on the enclosed connectivity e�hi�it �see Connectivity �lan�� the intent is to e�tend the grid networ� of streets. �his grid pattern will provide for additional connections including the future e�tension of �ur� �rive and �outh ��st �venue. �uffalo �un will initially utili�e �ur� �rive and �outh ��st �venue for access. �hese streets are interconnected with the grid networ� that has �een esta�lished with the �eadow Cree� �u�division. �his networ� will provide alternative routes and further disperse traffic. �s the north and south parcels are developed� provisions have �een incorporated in the plan to provide additional connections and access alternatives. �his interconnected networ� of streets and wal�a�le �loc� configuration will reinforce a multi�modal transportation program that will include �icycle� pedestrian� vehicle� and transit mo�ility alternatives. �s illustrated on the ur�an framewor� plan� �ur� �rive is proposed to e�tend to �owler �ane. �hile higher residential density on the properties� would result in an increase in vehicle trips� the increase would �e minimal and have a negligi�le impact on the overall motori�ed transportation system. �u�lic and private streets are designed to provide pedestrian wal�s on �oth sides of the street. �he ��’ open space corridor located within the center of the property also includes a pedestrian wal�. �uffalo �un will also provide for an e�tension of the �eadow �rail regional trail system. �s a result of the a�ove factors� the proposed �one map amendment is not anticipated to have a negative effect on the motori�ed or non�motori�ed transportation systems. PAGE 21 66 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT ���� ��������  �������p� ������������  ���� ������ �����������  �����op���� �o�������� �� ������������ �� ������������  ��� ���� ���� ������� ����� �� ������� �o�o���o �����  �����o������o���o� G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Bozeman’s Unified Development Code, 38.700����� ������� �o�p������ �����op���� �� “��� ��� o� ���� ��� ��� �o��������o� ��� ��� o� ���������� ����� �� �� ����o�� ���� ���o����� �����op����� �������� ������o��oo��� ��� ��� �o��� ��� o����tives of the city’s adopted growth policy. Elements o� �o�p������ �����op���� �������� ��� ��� �o� ������� �o� ������� o� ������������� ������� ������ o� ������������� ��������� ������ ���������� ���������� �������� ������� �o� ��� �������� ����� �o��� o� op�����o�� ��� ���������o� ���� �������� �o������� ������� ��������� ����� ��� ����� ��������� ������� �������� �� ��� ����� �o�o����� ��� �o���o�o����� �����po�����o� ��� op�� �p���� ��� p����� �o�p������ �����op���� �o�� �o� ������� ����o����� o� �o�o�o�� o� ������������� o� ���� design, density or use.” �o�p������ ���� ��� �� �� “A land use which may by ������ o� ��� ��������������� o� ��� ����������� o������ ������� ����� �� ����o�� ���� �� ���o����� ���� ��� o� ��������� ���������� ������� o���� �������� �o ��������� �o�p��������� �������� ��� ��� �o� ������� �o �o���� o�o�� ����� ��� ��� p������� o� p������� ������� ���� �� �o��������� or explosive materials.” ��� ��o��� po���� ��ppo��� p�o������ � ������� o� �o����� op��o�� ���� ��������� ��p�o������ oppo���������� ��� �����po�����o� op��o��� ��� p�opo��� ��� ��������� ���� ������ ������ ����������� ��������� �� �� ���� ���� �o����� ������ p�o������ o� ��� �o����� ����� ���������� ��� ��� ������ ���p�� �o����� �o ��� �o�������� �� �o���� ��� ������� �o����� ��p� ������ ���� �������� �� p�������� ������ ������ ��������� ��o������ ����������� �o����� �� ��� ���� ���� ������� ��� �o����� op��o�� �o� ���� ��������� �� � ������������o��� pop�����o�� ��p������ ��� ����o� ����� p��� ��� p�o������ ������o��� op�� �p���� ����� �o������o� ��� ��������o��� oppo��������� ������� �����o���� ��� ���������� ��� ����� o� �o�������� �������� ������o��� ��������� ����� ���o p�o����� ��� �o���� �o������� �o�p���������� �� �o��� ��o��� ��� ������ ��o��� p������ ���� �� ������o��� �o o���� ��o�� ��� �o���� ���� �o����o� ��� �� ��� ����������o� o� ������oo� �� ���� ������� ������� �o�p���������� �� �� ������p���� ���� ������o��� �o�� ������������o�� ���� �� ��� ��� ��� ���� �� �o����� ��o�� ��� �o���� ���� �o����o�� H. Character of the district. ��� p�opo��� ��������� �o ��� �o��� ���o� �o� ������ ����������� ���������� �� ��� ����������� ����o������ ���� �� p�������� ����������� o� �������op��� ��� ������o� o� o������� ������������ ����o� ������ �o��� �� p�������� �� �������� ��� ��������� o� ��� ��������� �� �o���� ����� ���� ��� ������o��� �o o���� �� ���� ���� o� ��� ���� ��������� ��� �o���� ���� �o����o� �� ���������� I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. ��� ������o ��� p�op���� �� �o����� ������ �� ���� ��� �������� �o � ���o� ������ ����o�� ���� �� p�o������ �o �� ���������� �� �o���� ��� ��� �������� ���o�� �o� ������� ����������� ���������� ��� �o�� ����������� ���� �� ��� ��� �������� ��� �o �� ���o����� �o ����������� �� � ������� ��� ���o��� ���� �� ��� ��� �������� ��� �������� �o� ���� ���� �� ��� ���� �o��� ������ p�������� ������������ J. Conserving the value of buildings. ��� ��� ���������o� ���o�� �o� ���� ������� ��������� ����������� �����op����� ��� �o����� ������� �����op���� �o�� ������� ���� �����op���� ���� �� p�������� ����������� ���� ������� �o��������� ��� po������� ������ �� �����op���� p������ ��������� ��o� ��� ��� ���������o� ���� p�o���� �o� ����������� ����������� ������������� ��p�� ��� ������� ����� ��� �o���� �o��� ��� ���� p������ ��� p���o�������� �������op�� ��� ��� �o���� ��������� ���� ���o� �o� ��������� �o �� �������� ��� �o��������� �o �o�p������ ��� ���� �� ������o��� �o �� ��������� ���� �o��������� ����� ��� ��� ����������� ����� ��� ������ po������� �o�������� ���� ��o�� �o���� ���� ��� ������� o����� ��� ��������� �o��������� PAGE 22 67 BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT �and �lanning  �andscape Architecture  �eal Estate �easibility  Development Consulting �� 303.8�3.��88 �� 303.8�3��7��  �7� �est ��th Avenue, �uite E, Denver, Colorado 80�0�  www.vogelassoc.com �he �eadow Cree� par� is designed to serve as an active recreation and gathering space. �ith the additional �.� acres being incorporated into the par�, it also serves as a significant buffer between the �eadow Cree� single family homes and higher density residential envisioned for Buffalo �un. As a result, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to compromise existing buildings located within the area. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. �he proposed ��� zone map amendment will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the growth policy designates the property as “Residential,” which the proposed R�� designation will implement. �he City is in need of additional housing to accommodate current and pro�ected demand including housing re�uired for the �racle Campus. �o meet this demand a variety of housing options near services, employment centers, and transportation options are needed. �his zone map amendment will help address this need by allowing for higher residential densities. Spot Zoning Criteria �he ��� zoning amendment does not constitute impermissible spot zoning. 1. �s the proposed use significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area� �he re�uested zoning and the proposed use of the site is not “significantly” different from the prevailing uses in the area, as the �eadow Cree� subdivision to the east is also characterized as residential in both land use category and zoning. �herefore, the proposed ��� zoning designation would not result in primary uses of the site which are significantly different from prevailing land uses in proximity. �hile ��� does allow for limited commercial uses, this pro�ect is intending to construct a residential subdivision at this location. 2. �s the area re�uested for the rezone rather small in terms of the number of separate landowners benefited from the proposed change� ��� is an implementing zoning district for the �esidential land use category and may be utilized by any ad�acent property owner within this plan category. �oreover, the proposed zoning of ��� does not inhibit potential development of ad�acent sites. 3. �ould the change be in the nature of “special legislation” designed to benefit only one or a few landowners at the expense of the surrounding landowners or the general public� �his initial zone map amendment does not represent special legislation designed to benefit the landowner at the expense of the ad�acent property owners. �his application demonstrates that the re�uested zoning of ��� is compatible with the zoning district’s plan. No substantial negative impacts to surrounding landowners have been identified due to this proposed zoning. PAGE 23 68 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND INITIAL ZONE MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION Bozeman, MT March 30, 2020 69 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT SHEET INDEX SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - COVER SHEET PAGE 1-3: A1 FORM PAGE 4-6: ANNX FORM ____________________________________ PAGE 7: PROJECT TEAM PAGE 8-9: PROJECT OVERVIEW PAGE 10: CONTEXT PLAN AND EXISTING CONDITIONS PAGE 11: URBAN FRAMEWORK PLAN PAGE 12: CONNECTIVITY PLAN PAGE 13: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN PAGE 14-18: NARRATIVE CONTINUED BUFFALO RUN EXHIBITS - COVER SHEET PAGE 20: CONTEXT PLAN PAGE 21: URBAN FRAMEWORK PLAN PAGE 22: CONNECTIVITY PLAN: PAGE 23: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN PAGE 24: EXISTING LAND USE PLAN PAGE 25: EXISITING ZONING MAP PAGE 26: ZONING PATTERN ANALYSIS SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION - COVER SHEET PAGE 28-30: PLATTING CERTIFICATE PAGE 31-33: ARTICLE OF ORGANIZATION PAGE 34-47: DEED PAGE 48-50: NOTICING MATERIALS 70 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT SHEET INDEX- SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS ________________________________ PAGE 1-3: A1 FORM PAGE 4-6: ANNX FORM 71 PAGE 1 To Be Determined 72 PAGE 73 2 PAGE 74 3 PAGE 75 4 PAGE 76 5 PAGE 77 6 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Land Planning  Landscape Architecture  Real Estate Feasibility  Development Consulting V: 303.893.4288 F: 303.893-6792  475 West 12th Avenue, Suite E, Denver, Colorado 80204  www.vogelassoc.com Buffalo Run Project Team The following is an outline of the Buffalo Run project team. Owner/Developer: Yellowstone Investment Group, LLC 40 Boxcar Lane Bozeman, MT. 59718 Contact: Derek Williams Phone: (303) 887-4045 Email: derek@bridgerdevelop.com Planner and Landscape Architect: Vogel & Associates, LLC 475 W. 12th Avenue, Suite E Denver, CO. 80204 Contact: Jeffrey Vogel, AICP Phone: (303) 893-4288 Email: jvogel@vogelassoc.com Architect: Intrinsik Architecture, Inc. 111 North Tracy Avenue Bozeman, MT. 59715 Contact: Robert Pertzborn, AIA Phone: (406) 582-8988 Email: rpertzborn@intrinsikarchitecture.com Ivins Design, LLC 7373 E. Ellsworth, Ave Denver, CO. 80209 Contact: Bruce Ivins, AIA Phone: (303) 829-0308 Email: ivinsdesign@comcast.net Civil Engineer and Survey: Morrison-Maierle 2880 Technology Blvd. W Bozeman, MT. 58718 Contact: Matt Ekstrom, PE Phone: (406) 922-6784 Email: mekstrom@m-m.net Legal: Swimley Law 1807 W. Dickerson, Unit B Bozeman, MT. 58718 Contact: Susan B. Swimley Phone: (406) 586-5544 Email: swimley@swimleylaw.com PAGE 78 7 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Project Overview Project Vision Buffalo Run is envisioned to be a residential community that will provide enduring value to the City of Bozeman and the region. A cohesive residential community and urban framework plan that is grounded in a constant set of integrated planning principles. The vision and directives for Buffalo Run were developed and influenced by several factors related to the environment, community and the social considerations within the region. Outlined below are the integrated planning principles that have been incorporated into the program and conceptual master plan. These principles are to serve as a guide for all levels and elements of design, phasing and implementation. The integrated planning principles are as follows. Principle One: Enhance community networks and open space. Principle Two: Identify and sustain green infrastructure. Principle Three: Protect environmental systems. Principle Four: Establish a diversity of housing types. Principle Five: Enhance Community connectivity. The above principles are consistent with City of Bozeman Community Plan principles including establishing cohesive neighborhoods that creates a sense of place. Other principles include preserving natural amenities and incorporating appropriate urban densities that are consistent with the directives above and the enclosed urban framework plan. Buffalo Run is also envisioned and planned to advance the vision statements, goals and objectives outlined in the Bozeman Strategic Plan and Community Plan. This includes incorporating a diversity of housing to the area as required to support an “Innovative Economy” and “balanced” community. a. Community Quality Goal - 1: “Human Scale and Compatibility - Create a community composed of neighborhoods designed for the human scale and compatibility in which the streets and buildings are properly sized within their context, services and amenities are convenient, visually pleasing, and properly integrated.” Buffalo Run is planned as a neighborhood that is configured within a development pattern that includes pedestrian oriented streets, walkable blocks and a central open space system. A hierarchy of parks are programed to serve as human-scaled gathering areas. b. Community Quality Objective C-3.2: “Provide for neighborhood focal points to encourage local identity within the community and provide a place for social interaction.” Buffalo Run is configured to include a variety of focal points that will foster community gathering and social interaction. This includes the enlarged Meadow Creek Park, neighborhood greens, and community clubhouse. The central pedestrian street corridor creates a visual and physical connection to the community center, ponds and green space. This central amenity area serves as the focal point of the project. Other architectural elements and landmarks may be incorporated into the respective spaces. c. Community Quality Objective C-3.5: “Integrate a wide variety of open lands, such as parks, trails, squares, greens, playing fields, natural areas, orchards and gardens, greenways, and other outdoor spaces into neighborhoods.” Buffalo Run is planned to include a hierarchy of parks and open space areas that accommodate a variety of active and passive recreation uses. These spaces also serve as community focal points and gathering areas. This program will include providing for an enlarged Meadow Creek Park that will serve as a primary amenity for the existing Meadow Creek and proposed Buffalo Run neighborhood. The existing single-family home located PAGE 79 8 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT within the east quadrant of the property will be re-purposed into a community clubhouse. The grounds surrounding the clubhouse may include a meandering trail around the enhanced ponds and gardens to support culinary programming and events. This facility will include a multi-purpose room, fitness center, pool and other amenities. d. Housing Goal H-1: “Promote an adequate supply of safe, quality housing that is diverse in type, density, cost, and location with an emphasis on maintaining neighborhood character and stability.” Buffalo Run is proposed to provide alternative housing types to a quadrant of the City that currently has been developed predominantly as single family detached. A diverse housing program within the Buffalo Run community will include a mix of for-sale and for rent product ranging from 1 bedroom to 3 bedrooms. The diversity in unit sizes will allow for young singles or professionals while the larger units offer options for families and retirees. The mix of for-sale and for rent product provides residents a variety of financial options and opportunities for home ownership at reasonable market rates. e. Housing Objective 1.3: “Promote the provision of a wide variety of housing types in a range of costs to meet the diverse residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Rezoning the Buffalo Run parcel to R-5 will allow for a variety of housing to be implemented to accommodate a multi-generational and dimensional population. f. Housing Objective 1.4: “Recognize the role of housing in economic development.” Allowing for a diverse housing program/stock accommodates a more diverse and multi-income population. A reliable and diverse housing program is required to support employment generators including educational facilities. g. Housing Objective 2.1: “Encourage socially and economically diverse neighborhoods.” Buffalo Run proposes incorporating a variety of housing and recreational amenities for a variety of residents and users. The additional housing alternatives and amenity program will provide for a more balanced and enriched neighborhood. Within the immediate context of a large single-family housing stock, the project proposes for-sale and for rent product that addresses the needs of residents attending or employed at MSU, the Oracle Campus and the rising young professional demographic. h. Housing Objective 3.3: “Promote the development of a wide variety of housing types, designs, and costs to meet the wide range of residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Buffalo Run and proposed zoning has the ability to provide much needed alternative housing choices. PAGE 80 9 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Context Plan and Existing Conditions Buffalo Run is located on approximately 20.3 acres that is located within unincorporated Gallatin County. Enclosed is a context plan for your reference. This 20.3 acres is located within the urban services boundary, on the southwest edge of the City of Bozeman. It is within proximity of other residential communities including the Meadow Creek subdivision that is located to the east. Other non-residential and educational uses within proximity of the Buffalo Run project include Montana State University and the Oracle Campus located to the northeast. The site is located within an Opportunity Zone which are areas designated for growth and development. The property is defined by Fowler Lane on the west and the Meadow Creek subdivision/park on the east. Undeveloped parcels currently utilized for agriculture are located on the north and south side of the Buffalo Run parcel. The Buffalo Run parcel is currently zoned Agricultural Suburban within the County providing for predominantly agricultural land uses. Parcels located on the north, west and south are zoned Agriculture Suburban. This parcel has historically been utilized for agricultural purposes. A single-family detached home and accessory structure is located within the northwest corner of the site. The Meadow Creek subdivision is located within the City of Bozeman and is zoned R3. Existing site characteristics includes gentle topography that includes expansive vistas to the surrounding mountains. Vegetation consists of predominantly grasslands and small clusters of trees that are located adjacent to the existing single-family home. An irrigation ditch transcends west to the central north section of the property. The irrigation ditch connects to a terraced pond system that is located within the northwest quadrant of the site. It has been confirmed that this irrigation system is not a designated water course. Currently access to the site is provided via Fowler Lane that is an unpaved road. Fowler Lane is designated as a future minor arterial. Kurk Drive is a paved street that also provides access at the northeast corner of the site. The project intends to make Kurk Drive the primary access point along with connections to 31st drive upon approval. Existing utilities on the site include electric and water via a well that are utilized for the existing home. Existing City water and sewer mains are located east of the parcel within the Meadow Creek subdivision. PAGE 10 Blackwood Rd Montana State University Oracle Campus Bobcat Stadium SITE 1 mile 2 mile 3 mile Bozeman Health Deaconess Hospital Downtown Bozeman Stucky Rd Blackwood Rd S 19th Ave Fowler Ln 81 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Urban Framework Plan This proposed amendment and urban framework plan promotes public health, safety and the general welfare of the community. A significant component of the plan includes establishing an urban framework plan that reinforces community goals with regards to establishing land uses and housing that will provide for a sustainable and innovative community. Planning objectives also include enhancing regional and community connectivity for pedestrian and transportation vehicles including mass transit. The framework also provides for additional parks and open space including enlarging the existing Meadow Creek park. PAGE 82 11 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Connectivity The proposed zoning amendment and urban framework plan will provide for fire and other emergency vehicles. This proposed amendment and urban framework work plan provides two points of access as outlined in the narrative below. The enclosed connectivity plan illustrates proposed vehicle and pedestrian connections. This includes utilizing open space, parks and pedestrian oriented streets to provide connections within and adjacent to the Buffalo Run project. Streets are configured to reinforce the urban grid that is envisioned for Bozeman and the region. This includes integrating and expanding the grid that has been established at the Meadow Creek subdivision. The street configuration is aligned to extend Kurk Drive to the future Fowler Lane minor arterial and adjacent street network including proposed north/south connections that may be constructed in the future. As illustrated, the grid and second point of access is to be provided via South 31st Ave to Meah Lane. This street network provides for walkable blocks that will provide alternative pedestrian and vehicle routes. The grid will further disperse traffic and provides a safe corridor for pedestrians. As illustrated on the enclosed exhibits, both public and private pedestrian-oriented streets are configured to connect with the open space and park system. The intent is to provide community and regional users alternative routes to access the park and trail amenities. This network will further be enhanced as the adjacent framework is developed in the future. The framework plan and park also propose extending the Meadow Trail to the west to the future Fowler Lane minor arterial. PAGE 83 12 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Parks and Open Space The Buffalo Run framework plan incorporates a comprehensive parks and open space system. As illustrated on the parks and open space plan, there is a hierarchy of spaces that have been configured within the plan. This open space program includes active play areas, passive open space and trail corridors. Pedestrian oriented streets and trail corridors connect parks and open space areas. As illustrated on the attached, an additional 2.6 acres of the parkland is to be dedicated to the existing Meadow Creek Park exceeding the required public land dedication. In addition to increasing the size of the park, additional improvements to the park are also proposed that may include sport courts, a pavilion and the relocation/enlargement of the existing neighborhood playground. Specific elements including the playground is to be located to provide access and use for both the Buffalo Run and Meadow Creek neighborhood. Upon further review with the parks department, specific program elements to be included in the park will be finalized. Located on the west side of the Buffalo Run neighborhood is existing seasonal terraced pond system that is being utilized to serve as a passive park area that will include a looped trail system, benches and other site elements. The clubhouse will serve as a community gathering space and may include a multi-purpose room, fitness facility and pool. Two neighborhood greens are located within the central portion of the community and adjacent to the proposed north/south 30’ trail corridor. These neighborhood greens are designed to accommodate shade structures, grills and other community amenities. The 30’ trail corridor provides a pedestrian connection to the adjacent north and south parcels that also includes access to the extended Meadow Trail. PAGE 84 13 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Infrastructure, Utilities and Public Facilities In addition to the transportation network described above, City water and sewer services will be incorporated into the community. This will include extending central water and sewer from the Meadow Creek subdivision. Other utilities including natural gas and electric will also be extended to the parcel. Renewable energy alternatives are also being considered and evaluated. Meadow Creek Park and proposed trail corridors will be provided for public use. Public access will also be provided to the community open space area surrounding the clubhouse. Land Use and Zoning The proposed zoning is in accordance with City growth policies. In keeping with the principles and directives outlined above, the Buffalo Run development plan is proposed to include multi-household residential housing that will offer both “for sale” and rental housing choices. Incorporating multi-household residential within this area of the City will create additional housing diversity. Providing housing for different income levels and demographic groups is a critical component in establishing a sustainable and multi-dimensional community. The current site plan meets the R-4 zoning density requirements; however, the R-5 classification affords more design flexibility and will therefore yields a higher quality project for the future residents. R-5 provides a platform for architectural relief and variations in roof profiles, improved quality of interior space and natural light. The variable roof lines and building heights will procure a more sophisticated profile and architectural diversity. As illustrated on the City of Bozeman General Land Use Plan, the southern quadrant of the City is predominantly comprised of single-household detached units with isolated pockets for multi-household residential. As the southwest quadrant of the City continues to urbanize, the intent is to provide additional locations that can accommodate a diverse housing stock and contribute to the character of the District that is envisioned for this area. This land use pattern will reinforce more compatible urban growth within the southwest quadrant of the City. Given that Fowler Lane is designated as a minor arterial, it is anticipated that this corridor will be urbanized to include residential and mixed land use designations that will be compatible with the proposed R-5 zoning and higher density residential. As illustrated on the attached land use exhibit, it is anticipated that future growth along Fowler Lane and other collectors and arterials will include more broad land use classifications with zoning that will support more mixed use and high density residential. Buffalo Run’s proximity to the University and Oracle campus provides an opportunity for student and workforce and young professionals. A multi-household development program is contemplated to include one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three- bedroom units. Utilizing the framework that has been established with the plan, all residents will have convenient access to community and regional amenities. The intent is to annex the parcel into the City of Bozeman utilizing a zoning classification of R-5. This zoning classification will allow for the multi-household residential that will include a minimum gross density of 8 dwelling units per acre. This proposed zoning does not adversely affect other potential zone districts that may be designated for the parcels located to the north and south of the Buffalo Run parcel. The urban framework plan reflects principles, standards and patterns that integrate with the existing neighborhood and future urban growth areas. Annexation The intent is to annex the 20.3 acres parcel to the City of Bozeman. Enclosed is the application including the checklist that addresses items 1-2. Outlined below are responses to items 3-9. 3. Is the property is currently in agricultural use please identify current crops/conditions Response: The area adjacent to the existing house is comprised of turf. Native grasses are located on the balance of the site. 4. Number of residential units existing on the property? Response: There is one single family structure located on the west side of the property. PAGE 85 14 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT 5. Number and type of commercial structures on the property? Response: No commercial structures are located on the property. An accessory agriculture building is located on the site. 6. Estimate of existing population on the property? Response: The existing home is currently accommodating two adults. 7. Assessed value of the property? Response: Assessed Value $2,200,000. 8. Existing on-site facilities and utilities (gas, power, telephone, cable, septic systems, wells)? Response: Utilities that including electric, gas, power, telephone, cable, a septic system and a well is provided for the existing house. Zone Map Amendment Approval Criteria As outlined on the enclosed application, the intent is to amend the zone map to include the R-5 zone classification. Outlined below is a summary of the review criteria for this zoning amendment. A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the subject property as Residential. Under the growth policy’s description of the residential future land use category it states “High density residential areas should be established near commercial centers to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities to persons without requiring the use of an automobile. Implementation of this category by residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in proximity to commercial centers.” Buffalo Run is located adjacent to Fowler Lane which is proposed as a minor arterial. The Fowler Lane and Blackwood Rd intersection is located just south of the Buffalo Run parcel. It is anticipated that this intersection will be developed in the future to include residential/commercial centers and higher density residential. Enclosed is an exhibit (see Potential Zoning Pattern Analysis) illustrating a potential land use and zoning pattern for the Fowler Lane, Blackwood Rd and Stucky Rd. The proposed R-5 would be consistent with this growth pattern. B. Security, safety from fire and other dangers. Buffalo Run will be served by City emergency services, including police and fire. The proposed street network will provide multiple routes and access points for emergency vehicles. C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. The Buffalo Run project will require site plan review and compliance with the City’s Unified Development Code which ensures the promotion of public health, safety and general welfare. This proposed plan allows for additional housing alternatives and provides significant public parks and open space. D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements. Buffalo Run includes a street network that will enhance regional and community connectivity. This network includes extensions to the existing street system and Fowler Lane. Incorporating a gridded configuration of streets provide alternative routes and dispersed traffic. PAGE 86 15 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT PAGE 16 City water and sewer is located east of the parcel. The intent is to extend the existing utilities as required to serve the Buffalo Run project. A comprehensive storm water system will also be implemented. The Buffalo Run project proposed expanding the Meadow Creek Park and incorporating additional recreational facilities. Other public open space and parks are included in the plan providing for a variety of gathering and recreation alternatives. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Depending on the pitch of the roof, the R-5 district allows for building heights that are 10 feet higher than what is allowed in the R-4 district. This additional height allows for more flexibility and articulation in the architectural design including roof forms. Additional building height allows for taller interior floor to floor dimensions and larger expanses of windows and/or glass doors. This not only provides more natural light into the units but increases the building facade transparency and architectural interest. The R-5 affords more flexibility to design more meaningful outdoor spaces including roof decks, which will be dispersed amongst the unit types. Natural and healthier air flow is easier to achieve with taller interior spaces. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. As outlined above and illustrated on the enclosed connectivity exhibit (see Connectivity Plan), the intent is to extend the grid network of streets. This grid pattern will provide for additional connections including the future extension of Kurk Drive and South 31st Avenue. Buffalo Run will initially utilize Kurk Drive and South 31st Avenue for access. These streets are interconnected with the grid network that has been established with the Meadow Creek Subdivision. This network will provide alternative routes and further disperse traffic. As the north and south parcels are developed, provisions have been incorporated in the plan to provide additional connections and access alternatives. As illustrated on the urban framework plan, Kurk Drive is proposed to extend to Fowler Lane. While higher residential density on the properties, would result in an increase in vehicle trips, the increase would be minimal and have a negligible impact on the overall motorized transportation system. Public and private streets are designed to provide pedestrian walks on both sides of the street. The 30’ open space corridor located within the center of the property also includes a pedestrian walk. Buffalo Run will also provide for an extension of the Meadow Trail regional trail system. As a result of the above factors, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to have a negative effect on the motorized or non-motorized transportation systems. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Bozeman’s Unified Development Code, 38.700.404, defines compatible development as “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city’s adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” Compatible land use is as “A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often 87 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to noise, odor, light and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials.” The growth policy supports providing a variety of housing options near services, employments opportunities, and transportation options. The proposed R-5 amendment will enable higher residential densities in an area that located within proximity of the Montana State University and the Oracle Campus located to the northeast. As noted, the current housing type within this quadrant is primarily single family detached. Providing alternative housing in the area will enhance the housing options for what currently is a multidimensional population. Expanding the Meadow Creek park and providing additional open space, trail connection and recreational opportunities further reinforces the livability and sense of community. Creating additional gathering areas also provides and foster community compatibility. As noted above, the future growth pattern that is envisioned to occur along the Fowler Lane corridor and at the intersection of Blackwood Rd will further enhance compatibility. It is anticipated that additional zone classifications such as R-O and R-5 will be located along the Fowler Lane corridor. H. Character of the district. The proposed amendment to R-5 would allow for higher residential densities. As the immediately surrounding area is primarily residential or undeveloped, the addition of offices, restaurants, and/or retail could be perceived as changing the character of the district. As noted, these uses are envisioned to occur as this area of the City including the Fowler Lane corridor is urbanized. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. The Buffalo Run property is located within an area and adjacent to a major street network that is projected to be urbanized. As noted, the R-5 district allows for greater residential densities. All non- residential uses in the R-5 district are to be secondary to residences. As a result, the allowed uses in the R-5 district are suitable for this site as the area would remain primarily residential. J. Conserving the value of buildings. The R-5 designation allows for high density mixed-use residential development, the Bozeman Unified Development Code ensures that development will be primarily residential with limited commercial. The potential change in development pattern resulting from the R-5 designation will provide for alternative residential architectural types and styles. While the north, south and west parcels are predominantly undeveloped the R-5 zoning amendment will allow for buildings to be designed and constructed to compliment and that is envisioned to be urbanized with commercial, mixed use and residential uses. The future potential commercial uses along Fowler Lane may include office and mixed-use commercial. The Meadow Creek park is designed to serve as an active recreation and gathering space. With the additional 2.6 acres being incorporated into the park, it also serves as a significant buffer between the Meadow Creek single family homes and higher density residential envisioned for Buffalo Run. As a result, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to compromise existing buildings located within the area. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. The proposed R-5 zone map amendment will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the growth policy designates the property as “Residential,” which the proposed R-5 designation will implement. The City is in need of additional housing to accommodate current and projected demand including housing required for the Oracle Campus. To meet this demand a variety of housing options near services, employment centers, and transportation options are needed. This zone map amendment will help address this need by allowing for higher residential densities. PAGE 88 17 BUFFALO RUN ANNEXATION AND ZONING AMENDMENT Bozeman, MT Spot Zoning Criteria The R-5 zoning amendment does not constitute impermissible spot zoning. 1. Is the proposed use significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area? The requested zoning and the proposed use of the site is not “significantly” different from the prevailing uses in the area, as the Meadow Creek subdivision to the east is also characterized as residential in both land use category and zoning. Therefore, the proposed R-5 zoning designation would not result in primary uses of the site which are significantly different from prevailing land uses in proximity. While R-5 does allow for limited commercial uses, this project is intending to construct a residential subdivision at this location. 2. Is the area requested for the rezone rather small in terms of the number of separate landowners benefited from the proposed change? R-5 is an implementing zoning district for the Residential land use category and may be utilized by any adjacent property owner within this plan category. Moreover, the proposed zoning of R-5 does not inhibit potential development of adjacent sites. 3. Would the change be in the nature of “special legislation” designed to benefit only one or a few landowners at the expense of the surrounding landowners or the general public? This initial zone map amendment does not represent special legislation designed to benefit the landowner at the expense of the adjacent property owners. This application demonstrates that the requested zoning of R-5 is compatible with the zoning district’s plan. No substantial negative impacts to surrounding landowners have been identified due to this proposed zoning. PAGE 89 18 SHEET INDEX - EXHIBITS __________________________ PAGE 24: CONTEXT PLAN PAGE 25: URBAN FRAMEWORK PLAN PAGE 26: CONNECTIVITY PLAN PAGE 27: PARK AND OPEN SPACE PLAN PAGE 28: EXISTING LAND USE PLAN PAGE 29: EXISTING ZONING MAP PAGE 30: POTENTIAL ZONING PATTERN ANALYSIS BUFFALO RUN ZONE MAP AMENDMENT - EXHIBITS Bozeman, MT 90 PAGE 24 91 PAGE 25 92 PAGE 26 93 PAGE 27 94 PAGE 28 95 PAGE 29 96 PAGE 30 97 BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PRELIMINARY SANITARY SEWER COLLECTION DESIGN REPORT July 2020 PREPARED BY: MMI #: 6475.002 98 Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1 2 PROBLEM DEFINED (DEQ 11.11) ...................................................................................................... 1 3 DESIGN CONDITIONS (DEQ 11.12) ................................................................................................... 1 4 IMPACT ON EXISTING WASTEWATER FACILITIES (11.13) ............................................................ 3 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (11.14) ....................................................................................................... 4 6 DRAWINGS (11.15) .............................................................................................................................. 4 7 DESIGN CRITERIA (11.16) .................................................................................................................. 4 8 SITE INFORMATION (11.17) ............................................................................................................... 4 9 ALTERNATIVE SELECTION/ANALYSIS (11.18) ................................................................................ 4 10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (11.19) ............................................................................................. 4 APPENDICES Appendix A Location Map (by Vogel & Associates) Appendix B Collection System Map (from City of Bozeman GIS Infrastructure Viewer) Appendix C As-built Plans (from Meadow Creek Subdivision by Engineering, Inc.) Appendix D Sewer Capacity Calculations Appendix E NRCS Soils Report Appendix F Geotechnical Report Prepared by: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. 2880 Technology Blvd. W. Bozeman, Montana 59771 Phone: (406) 587-0721 Fax: (406) 922-6702 99 Written By: LRH________ Checked By: MEE Approved By: JRN Project No.: 6475.002 N:\6475\002 - Topo and Boundary Survey\04 Design\Reports\Preliminary Sewer Report 2020\Preliminary_BuffaloRunSewerReport.docx 100 1 Buffalo Run Subdivision Preliminary Sewer Collection Design Report 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This design report provides a basis of design for the Buffalo Run Subdivision sewer main extension improvements project and is submitted in conjunction with the completed plans and specifications. The sewer distribution system serving the Buffalo Run Subdivision will be designed and installed in accordance with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Circular No. 2; Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS); The City of Bozeman Modifications to MPWSS; and the City of Bozeman Wastewater Facility Plan. The design report is to verify that there is an adequate capacity to receive wastewater flows from the proposed development. An analysis of the capacity of the downstream receiving infrastructure will be provided. The following design report follows the section numbering of the Circular DEQ-2 Standards for Public Sewage Systems (2018 Edition). 2 PROBLEM DEFINED (DEQ 11.11) a. The Buffalo Run Subdivision is located off of Kurk Drive between S 31st Ave and Fowler Ln. This project is currently located adjacent to the boundary of the City of Bozeman, Montana. See the vicinity map for location details. Yellowstone Investment Group, PLLC plans to construct thirteen (13) condominium buildings and a clubhouse as part of this development. This project involves extending approximately 2,945 feet of a new 8-inch sewer main extensions and 10 sewer manholes to serve the proposed development. Sewer facilities included in this project will be designed in accordance with Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) regulations. Flow and population data for the project will be consistent with the City’s approved Facilities Plan, where applicable. 3 DESIGN CONDITIONS (DEQ 11.12) The proposed development includes thirteen (13) buildings with 288 dwelling units (see info included in Appendix A). The capacity requirement for the sewer main extension is calculated as follows: Residential Flows 288 dwelling units (DU) Population = ~623 persons (288 DU x 2.17 people/DU) Design Values from 2014 Wastewater Facility Plan 2.17 People per DU 64.4 gallons per day (GPD) per person 2.17 people/DU * 64.4 GPD/person = 140 GPD/DU 101 2 Table 1: Sewer Flow Summary - Residential BUILDING TOTAL DU POPULATION AVG DAY FLOW (PEOPLE) (GPD) 1 20 43 2,800 2 20 43 2,800 3 24 52 3,360 4 20 43 2,800 5 24 52 3,360 6 22 48 3,080 7 24 52 3,360 8 22 48 3,080 9 20 43 2,800 10 24 52 3,360 11 20 43 2,800 12 24 52 3,360 13 24 52 3,360 TOTALS 288 623 40,320 ADF = 288 DU x 140 GPD/DU = 40,320 GPD Community Clubhouse Flows Assume (4) employees work out of the clubhouse Assume 1/3 of the total population use the clubhouse per day = 623/3 = 208 people ADF = (4 employees)(13 GPD) + (208 patrons/day)(3 GPD) = 676 GPD Infiltration ADF = 20.00 acres x 150 gallons/acre/day (COB Design Standards) = 3,000 GPD Total Average Day Flow Total Average Day Flow (TADF) = 40,320 GPD + 676 GPD + 3,000 GPD = 43,996 GPD = 30.5 GPM Total Peak Day Flow Population = TADF / 64.4 (GPD/person) = 43,996 GPD / 64.4 (GPD/person) = 684 people 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = 18+√0.650 4+√0.650 = 3.90 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 = 𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄 𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄 = 18 + √𝑃𝑃 4 + √𝑃𝑃 ; (𝑃𝑃 = 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑄𝑄𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 𝑃𝑃ℎ𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑄𝑄𝑃𝑃𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜) 102 3 Total Peak Day Flow = (ADFResidential + ADFClubhouse) x PF + ADFInfiltration = (40,320 GPD + 676 GPD) x 3.90 + 3,000 GPD = 162,898 GPD = 113 GPM Maximum flow within sewer mains installed at minimum grade (per DEQ-2) with a roughness coefficient (n) value of 0.013 are provided in the table below for typical main sizes. As illustrated below, an 8-inch pipe size is adequate for all sewer mains included within this development. Table 2: Sewer Main Capacity (SDR-35 PVC) NOMINAL PIPE SIZE MINIMUM SLOPE FLOW DEPTH CAPACITY CAPACITY (in) (ft/ft) (d/D) (GPD) (GPM) 8" 0.0040 0.75 438,500 305 10" 0.0028 0.75 665,200 462 12" 0.0022 0.75 937,400 651 Notes: - Flows were calculated using actual inside diameters of standard SDR-35 sewer pipe. 4 IMPACT ON EXISTING WASTEWATER FACILITIES (11.13) Impact on Downstream Flows – 8” Sewer – Kurk Drive The City of Bozeman has required the examination of the capacity of the existing downstream receiving sewer main in Kurk Drive (east of South 30th Avenue). The existing Meadow Creek Subdivision is currently the only contributor to the existing 8-inch sewer main in Kurk Dr. The Meadow Creek Subdivision is comprised entirely of residential development. The subdivision flow is conveyed to the 8-inch onsite sewer main, and subsequently conveyed east to the 12- inch sewer main along Enterprise Blvd. The 12-inch sewer main conveys wastewater north to the City of Bozeman Wastewater Treatment Plant. Based on the Meadow Creek Subdivision water and wastewater design report submitted to the city, the 8-inch main in Kurk Drive was designed to receive a peak demand of approximately 40 GPM. The capacity of 8-inch sewer mains installed at minimum grade is 305 GPM as shown in Table 2 above. Table 3 below indicates the analysis of this receiving sewer main. Table 3: Downstream Main Capacity Analysis LOCATION NOMINAL SIZE TOTAL CAPACITY (0.75 d/D) EXISTING FLOW AVAILABLE CAPACITY (in) (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) Kurk Dr 8 305 40 265 103 4 The proposed Buffalo Run Subdivision is estimated to have a peak flow of 157 GPM, which is less than the 265 GPM available capacity specified in Table 3 above. Therefore, the 8” receiving main in Kurk Dr is sufficiently sized to handle flow from the proposed development and would have an excess capacity of 152 GPM for future developments. 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (11.14) The sewer main extension for the Buffalo Run Subdivision will include the construction of approximately 2,945 feet of a new 8-inch SDR 35 PVC sanitary sewer main extensions and (10) 48” diameter sewer manholes. 6 DRAWINGS (11.15) Drawings identifying the site of the project, including the location and alignment of proposed facilities, will be provided with the final design report submitted with the future infrastructure plans. 7 DESIGN CRITERIA (11.16) Design criteria including average and peak flows as well as sewer depth information were provided in previous sections. The proposed sewer mains conform to the State’s minimum vertical and horizontal separation criteria from water mains. The proposed conventional gravity sewer collection system is to be constructed to City of Bozeman and the current edition of Montana Public Works (MPW) Standard Specifications. The sewer mains shall be 8-inch diameter SDR 35 Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) pipe. All manholes shall be standard concrete manholes spaced no more than 400 feet apart. 8 SITE INFORMATION (11.17) The property is currently zoned Agricultural Suburban and is located within the Gallatin County / Bozeman Area district but is being proposed for annexation into the City of Bozeman. The Buffalo Run Subdivision is located off of Kurk Drive between S 31st Ave and Fowler Ln. The property for the proposed development is currently an improved rural property which slopes gently to the north with existing grades of less than 4% and mostly Turner loam and Hyalite- Beaverton complex deposits (USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey) as shown in Appendix E. The groundwater levels onsite range between approximately 1 and 5 feet below existing grade based on well monitoring performed from March 2020 to July 2020. 9 ALTERNATIVE SELECTION/ANALYSIS (11.18) No proposed alternatives were considered 10 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (11.19) There are no expected environmental impacts from this sewer main extension, as the City of Bozeman Wastewater Treatment Plant has more than adequate capacity for this extension. 104 A APPENDIX A LOCATION MAP (by Vogel & Associates) 105 BUFFALO RUN Bozeman, Montana Land Planning 䘆 Landscape Architecture 䘆 Development Consulting 475 W. 12th Avenue - Suite E - Denver, Colorado 80204-3688 - (303) 893-4288 SITE DATA - DENSITY AND PARKING CONTEXT MAP NTS March 05, 2020 106 B APPENDIX B COLLECTION SYSTEM MAP (from City of Bozeman GIS Infrastructure Viewer) 107 VERIFY SCALE! THESE PRINTS MAY BE REDUCED. LINE BELOW MEASURES ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLY! COPYRIGHT © MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2020 SHEET NUMBER PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER NO. DESCRIPTION BY DATE N:\6475\002 - TOPO AND BOUNDARY SURVEY\ACAD\EXHIBITS\2020_PRELIMWATERSEWERDISTRIBUTION.DWG PLOTTED BY:LEE HAGEMAN ON Jul/25/2020 REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DSGN. BY: APPR. BY: DATE: Q.C. REVIEW DATE: BY: 2880 Technology Blvd West Bozeman, MT 59718 406.587.0721 www.m-m.net engineers surveyors planners scientists Morrison Maierle BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION BOZEMAN MONTANA EXISTING WASTEWATER COLLECTION MAP (FROM CITY OF BOZEMAN GIS MAPPER) 6475.002 EX-2 LRH 07/2020  BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION KURK DR S 30TH AVE ALLEY MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION PHASE 1 108 C APPENDIX C AS-BUILT PLANS (from Meadow Creek Subdivision by Engineering, Inc.) 109 110 111 D APPENDIX D SEWER CAPACITY CALCULATIONS 112 BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION SEWER CAPACITY CALCULATIONS SANITARY SEWER MAIN CAPACITY FOR COMMON SDR-35 NOMINAL PIPE SIZE AVERAGE ID MINIMUM SLOPE FLOW DEPTH CAPACITY CAPACITY (in) (in) (ft/ft) (d/D) (GPD) (GPM) 8" 7.92 0.0040 0.75 438,500 305 10" 9.90 0.0028 0.75 665,200 462 12" 11.78 0.0022 0.75 937,400 651 Notes: - Flows were calculated using actual inside diameters of standard SDR-35 sewer pipe. DOWNSTREAM COLLECTING MAIN CAPACITY NOMINAL SIZE TOTAL CAPACITY (0.75 d/D) EXISTING FLOW AVAILABLE CAPACITY (in) (GPM) (GPM) (GPM) Kurk Dr 8 305 40.15 264 Notes: - Existing flow was determined based on the design report for the Meadow Creek Subdivision (BOZ-05021.02) dated February 2006 LOCATION N:\6475\002 - Topo and Boundary Survey\04 Design\Calcs\Wastewater\SewerMainCapacity.xlsx 1 of 1 113 114 115 E APPENDIX E NRCS SOILS REPORT 116 United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Gallatin County Area, Montana Buffalo Run Natural Resources Conservation Service July 20, 2020117 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 118 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 119 Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Gallatin County Area, Montana.......................................................................13 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................................................................................................13 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................... 15 510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................16 References............................................................................................................18 4 120 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 121 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 122 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 123 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 124 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 5054430 5054480 5054530 5054580 5054630 5054680 5054730 5054430 5054480 5054530 5054580 5054630 5054680 5054730 493480 493530 493580 493630 493680 493730 493780 493830 493880 493930 493480 493530 493580 493630 493680 493730 493780 493830 493880 493930 45° 38' 46'' N 111° 5' 2'' W 45° 38' 46'' N 111° 4' 39'' W 45° 38' 35'' N 111° 5' 2'' W 45° 38' 35'' N 111° 4' 39'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 100 200 400 600 Feet 0 30 60 120 180 Meters Map Scale: 1:2,220 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 125 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 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 448A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 5.8 27.8% 457A Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 13.6 65.2% 510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 1.4 7.0% Totals for Area of Interest 20.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions 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, 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 11 127 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. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 128 Gallatin County Area, Montana 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56sq Elevation: 4,450 to 5,300 feet 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: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Hyalite and similar soils: 70 percent Beaverton and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hyalite Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt1 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 17 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt3 - 17 to 26 inches: very cobbly sandy clay loam 3C - 26 to 60 inches: very cobbly 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 (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 48 to 96 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043BP818MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 129 Description of Beaverton Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 5 to 21 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bk - 21 to 25 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam 2Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy coarse 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 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043BP818MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components 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 Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 130 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 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: Loamy (Lo) LRU 44B-B (R044BB032MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 15 131 Minor Components 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 Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) 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 510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56vt Elevation: 4,200 to 5,950 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Meadowcreek and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Meadowcreek Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Custom Soil Resource Report 16 132 Typical profile A - 0 to 11 inches: loam Bg - 11 to 25 inches: silt loam 2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly 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 24 to 42 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Subirrigated (Sb) LRU 44B-Y (R044BY150MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Blossberg Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 17 133 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 18 134 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 19 135 F APPENDIX F GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PRELIMINARY WATER DISTRIBUTION DESIGN REPORT July 2020 PREPARED BY: MMI #: 6475.002 168 1 Table of Contents 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 3 2 GENERAL INFORMATION (DEQ 1.1.1) .............................................................................................. 3 3 EXTENT OF WATER WORKS SYSTEM, INCLUDING (DEQ 1.1.2): ................................................. 3 4 ALTERNATE PLANS (1.1.3) ................................................................................................................ 4 5 SITE CONDITIONS (1.1.4) ................................................................................................................... 4 6 WATER USE DATA, INCLUDING (1.1.5): ........................................................................................... 4 7 FLOW REQUIREMENTS (1.1.6) .......................................................................................................... 6 8 SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY (1.1.7) ............................................................................................. 7 9 PROPOSED TREATMENT PROCESSES (1.1.8) ................................................................................ 7 10 SEWAGE SYSTEM AVAILABLE (1.1.9) ......................................................................................... 7 11 WASTE DISPOSAL (1.1.10) ............................................................................................................ 7 12 AUTOMATION (1.1.11) .................................................................................................................... 7 13 PROJECT SITES (1.1.12) ................................................................................................................ 7 14 FINANCING (1.1.13) ......................................................................................................................... 7 15 FUTURE EXTENSIONS (1.1.14) ...................................................................................................... 8 APPENDICES Appendix A Location Map (by Vogel & Associates) Appendix B Distribution System Map (from City of Bozeman GIS Infrastructure Viewer) Appendix C As-Built Plans (from Meadow Creek Subdivision by Engineering, Inc.) Appendix D Water Model Calibration Info Appendix E WaterCAD Results Appendix F NRCS Soils Report Appendix G Geotechnical Report 169 2 Prepared by: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. 2880 Technology Blvd. W. Bozeman, Montana 59771 Phone: (406) 587-0721 Fax: (406) 922-6702 Written By: LRH Checked By: MEE Approved By: JRN Project No.: 6475.002 N:\6475\002 - Topo and Boundary Survey\04 Design\Reports\Preliminary Water Report 2020\Preliminary_BuffaloRunWaterReport.docx 170 3 Buffalo Run Subdivision Preliminary Water Distribution Design Report 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides a basis for design of the Buffalo Run Subdivision water distribution system. The water distribution system serving the Buffalo Run Subdivision will be designed and installed in accordance with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Circular No. 1; Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS); The City of Bozeman Modifications to MPWSS; City of Bozeman Water Facility Plan; and the City of Bozeman Fire Service Line Standard. The design report is to verify that there is adequate volume and pressure to supply domestic and fire service for all the buildings in the proposed development. The following design report follows the section numbering of Circular DEQ-1-Standards for Water Works (2018 Edition) Section 1.1, Engineer’s Report. 2 GENERAL INFORMATION (DEQ 1.1.1) a. The proposed Buffalo Run Subdivision is located off Kurk Drive between S 31st Ave and Fowler Ln. This project is currently located adjacent to the boundary of the City of Bozeman, Montana. See the vicinity map for location details. This project involves extending approximately 4,720 feet of a new 8 -inch Class 51 DIP water pipe into the proposed development. The new 8-inch main will tie into the existing 8-inch water main along Kurk Drive and to the existing 8” water main located on Meah Lane, creating a looped system within the development. Each building will be serviced by separate fire and domestic water services. The project would propose approximately (11) eleven fire hydrant assemblies. b. The proposed water main infrastructure will be served by the City of Bozeman. c. Project Developer: Yellowstone Investment Group, PLLC 768 Oasis Dr Castle Rock, CO 80108 d. System Owner: City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 3 EXTENT OF WATER WORKS SYSTEM, INCLUDING (DEQ 1.1.2): The proposed water main extension is an extension of the City of Bozeman water infrastructure in the area. The water main extension is proposed to serve the Buffalo Run Subdivision which has the potential to include 288 dwelling units. The project will tie into two existing 8” mains located at the east boundary of the subdivision located on Kurk Drive and Meah Lane to create a looped distribution system within the 171 4 proposed development. The new 8” mains will connect to fire hydrants spaced throughout the development that will provide fire protection to the proposed project. Each of the thirteen (13) condominium buildings and the proposed clubhouse will be serviced by separate fire and domestic services. Service sizes will be determined prior to the final design report and infrastructure plans. These water main extensions will serve the buildout of the property. The water mains shall be extended to the property boundaries within proposed public rights-of-way to provide potential service connection for adjacent properties. 4 ALTERNATE PLANS (1.1.3) The alignment of the proposed main was chosen to meet the layout of the proposed development. No alternate plans were considered due to the limited availability of existing infrastructure to connect to. 5 SITE CONDITIONS (1.1.4) The property for the proposed development is currently an improved rural property which slopes gently to the north with existing grades of less than 4% and mostly Turner loam and Hyalite- Beaverton complex deposits (USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Web Soil Survey) as shown in Appendix E. A site-specific geotechnical report has been done for the Buffalo Run Subdivision by Rawhide Engineering Inc, dated March 16, 2020. The site is favorable for the building foundation construction. The geotechnical report was included as Appendix F. The groundwater levels onsite range between approximately 1 and 5 feet below existing grade based on well monitoring performed from March 2020 to July 2020. The groundwater flows generally from the south to the north based on general groundwater flow in the valley. The groundwater at this site is likely variable based on seasonal precipitation and irrigation practices. 6 WATER USE DATA, INCLUDING (1.1.5): The water distribution system serving the proposed project will be designed and installed in accordance with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) Circular No. 1; Montana Public Works Standard Specifications (MPWSS); the City of Bozeman Modifications to MPWSS; City of Bozeman Water Facility Plan; and the City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy. The following section addresses the design capacity and flow requirements discussed in Section 8 of DEQ – 1. The water main extension for the Buffalo Run Subdivision will service thirteen (13) condominium buildings and one clubhouse. The capacity requirement for the water main extension is calculated as follows: 172 5 Residential Demands: 288 dwelling units (DU) Population = ~608 persons (288 DU x 2.11 people/DU) Design Values from Bozeman Design Standards, March 2020 Version 2.11 People per DU 170 gallons per day (GPD) per person (Average Day Demand) Maximum Day Demand Peaking Factor = 2.3 Maximum Hour Demand Peaking Factor = 3.0 Table 1: Water Demand Summary BUILDING TOTAL DU AVG DAY DEMAND MAX DAY DEMAND MAX HR DEMAND (GPD) (GPD) (GPD) 1 20 7,174 16,500 21,522 2 20 7,174 16,500 21,522 3 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 4 20 7,174 16,500 21,522 5 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 6 22 7,891 18,150 23,674 7 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 8 22 7,891 18,150 23,674 9 20 7,174 16,500 21,522 10 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 11 20 7,174 16,500 21,522 12 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 13 24 8,609 19,800 25,826 TOTALS 288 103,306 237,600 309,914 Residential Demand Total Conversions (gallons/minute): ADD = 103,306 GPD = 71.7 GPM MDD = 237,600 GPD = 165 GPM MHD = 309,914 GPD = 215 GPM Community Clubhouse Demands: Assumptions: (4) employees work out of the clubhouse 1/3 of the total population use the clubhouse per day = 608/3 = 203 people ADD = (4 Employees)(13 GPD) + (203 users/day)(3 GPD) = 661 GPD = 0.5 GPM MDD = 2.3 x ADD = 2.3 x 0.7 = 1.6GPM MHD = 3.0 x ADD = 3.0 x 0.7 = 2.1GPM 173 6 Irrigation Demands: Based on the City of Bozeman’s Integrated Water Resources Plan September 2013, the 170 GPD per person includes all water use including irrigation. Total Domestic Demands: ADD: 71.7 GPM + 0.5 GPM = 72.2 GPM MDD: 165 GPM + 1.6 GPM = 167 GPM MHD: 215 GPM + 2.1 GPM = 217 GPM Fire Flow The total water demand for the system includes the Maximum Daily Demand and the maximum required fire flow of 1,500 GPM which based on the 26,570 SF (Building Type D) building of Type V-A Construction and sprinkler systems designed to meet NFPA 13R requirements. Table B105.1(2) of Appendix B of the International Fire Code requires 3,000 GPM fire flow for a building without sprinklers and allows 75% reduction for buildings with fire sprinklers. The reduced flow was calculated to be 750 GPM; however, the minimum flow allowed per code is 1,500 GPM for sprinklers meeting NFPA 13R requirements. For the purpose of this report, our model includes a fire flow demand of 1,500 GPM. The Maximum Daily Demand is calculated by multiplying the Average Daily Demand by a peaking factor of 2.3 as described above. Therefore, the following fire flow demand for the four buildings is as follows: Total Fire Flow = 167 GPM + 1,500 GPM = 1,667 GPM 7 FLOW REQUIREMENTS (1.1.6) Modeling Procedure Water modeling was performed using WaterCAD (Connect Edition 10.02.00.43) software to assess expected performance of the extensions on the distribution network. Water supply from the existing City water system has been modeled using reservoirs and pumps at boundary locations mimic distribution system output. Pump curves were developed using model outputs received from the City of Bozeman at varying flow rates during a maximum daily demand scenario. Use hydraulic model flow data (or fire flow results) represented using a reservoir and pump supply is a commonly used method to build a stand-alone model without reproducing the complete distribution system. Flows modeled at Hydrants #2112 (located on Kurk Drive, approximately 250 feet west of S 30th Ave) and #2108 (located on west Meah Lane) were used for calibration (Appendix C). The total water demand for the system includes the maximum daily demand and the required fire flow of 1,500 GPM as determined by the Insurance Services Office (ISO) criteria. The maximum daily demand is calculated by multiplying the average daily demand by a peaking factor of 2.3. The minimum pressure used for pipe main sizing was 35 PSI during normal uses and no less than 20 PSI residual pressure during fire hydrant full flow condition at any supply node. A “C” of 130 was used for the Hazen Williams pipe roughness factor. 174 7 Modeling Results The model’s results indicate that proposed 8-inch distribution mains for the Buffalo Run Subdivision will supply the needed maximum daily domestic flow with fire flow while maintaining above 20-psi residual pressure at all points within the modeled area. Pressure during MDD ranges from 39 to 48 PSI. During a MDD plus Fire Flow scenario (at Hydrant H-8) residual pressures ranged from 33 to 38 PSI (see the WaterCAD model results located in Appendix D for additional information). The residential condominiums are proposed to be 3 stories tall. Assuming 10 feet per story, a conservative estimate of the loss of pressure to residences on the top floor due to elevation is 13 psi. Based on this assumption, the minimum residual pressure experienced in the system would be 20 psi during the MDD plus Fire Flow scenario, which meets the minimum 20-psi residual pressure requirement. An automated fire flow analysis at all proposed hydrants was performed as well. The maximum fire flow available at all hydrant nodes was calculated during the maximum daily demand scenario. Based on this result, the minimum fire flow available was calculated to be 1,926 GPM at Hydrant H-3. This exceeds the 1,500 minimum fire flow requirement. 8 SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY (1.1.7) Water is supplied from City of Bozeman 9 PROPOSED TREATMENT PROCESSES (1.1.8) Non-applicable 10 SEWAGE SYSTEM AVAILABLE (1.1.9) The area is served by the City of Bozeman wastewater treatment facility 11 WASTE DISPOSAL (1.1.10) Non-applicable 12 AUTOMATION (1.1.11) Non-applicable 13 PROJECT SITES (1.1.12) The development is bounded by Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 to the east, vacant land to the north, Fowler Lane and vacant land to the west, and an improved rural property to the south. The wastewater at the site will be conveyed to the City of Bozeman wastewater treatment facility. 14 FINANCING (1.1.13) Non-applicable 175 8 15 FUTURE EXTENSIONS (1.1.14) No future extension will be needed. 176 A APPENDIX A LOCATION MAP (by Vogel & Associates) 177 BUFFALO RUN Bozeman, Montana Land Planning 䘆 Landscape Architecture 䘆 Development Consulting 475 W. 12th Avenue - Suite E - Denver, Colorado 80204-3688 - (303) 893-4288 SITE DATA - DENSITY AND PARKING CONTEXT MAP NTS March 05, 2020 178 B APPENDIX B DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM MAP (from City of Bozeman GIS Infrastructure Viewer) 179 VERIFY SCALE! THESE PRINTS MAY BE REDUCED. LINE BELOW MEASURES ONE INCH ON ORIGINAL DRAWING. MODIFY SCALE ACCORDINGLY! COPYRIGHT © MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC., 2020 SHEET NUMBER PROJECT NUMBER DRAWING NUMBER NO. DESCRIPTION BY DATE N:\6475\002 - TOPO AND BOUNDARY SURVEY\ACAD\EXHIBITS\2020_PRELIMWATERSEWERDISTRIBUTION.DWG PLOTTED BY:LEE HAGEMAN ON Jul/25/2020 REVISIONS DRAWN BY: DSGN. BY: APPR. BY: DATE: Q.C. REVIEW DATE: BY: 2880 Technology Blvd West Bozeman, MT 59718 406.587.0721 www.m-m.net engineers surveyors planners scientists Morrison Maierle BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION BOZEMAN MONTANA EXISTING WATER DISTRIBUTION MAP (FROM CITY OF BOZEMAN GIS MAPPER) 6475.002 EX-1 LRH 07/2020  BUFFALO RUN SUBDIVISION KURK DR MEAH LN S 30TH AVE BLACKWOOD DR S 31ST AVE MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION PHASE 1 180 C APPENDIX C AS-BUILT PLANS (from Meadow Creek Subdivision by Engineering, Inc.) 181 182 183 184 D APPENDIX D WATER MODEL CALIBRATION INFO 185 CITY OF BOZEMAN Fire Flow Request Form PHONE (406) 582-3200 FAX (406) 582-3201 Date: July 14th, 2020 Pressure Zone: South Hydrant GIS ID#: 2108, 2109, 2111, 2112 Adjacent Main: 8-inch DIP (In Kurk Dr and Meah Lane) Location Request: Buffalo Run Development Bozeman Infrastructure Viewer Website: https://gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=infrastructure The results of the fire flow information that you requested are as follows: Hydrant ID#: 2108 Maximum Day Demand Available Fire Flow at 20 psi: 2983.28 gpm Maximum Day Demand Minimum Pressure: 36.79 psi Hydrant ID#: 2109 Maximum Day Demand Available Fire Flow at 20 psi: 3130.47 gpm Maximum Day Demand Minimum Pressure: 37.57 psi Hydrant ID#: 2111 Maximum Day Demand Available Fire Flow at 20 psi: 3228.61 gpm Maximum Day Demand Minimum Pressure: 43.36 psi 186 Hydrant ID#: 2112 Maximum Day Demand Available Fire Flow at 20 psi: 2649.11 gpm Maximum Day Demand Minimum Pressure: 43.96 psi If you have questions or need further information feel free to email. Data Disclaimer: Water distribution information is calculated using hydraulic modeling software and is subject to variation. Actual field conditions may vary. This information is provided to the requestor for evaluation purposes only, without warranty of any kind, including, but not limited to any expressed or implied warranty arising by contract, stature, or law. In no event regardless of cause, shall the City be liable for any direct, indirect, special, punitive or consequential damages of any kind whether such damages arise under contract, tort, strict liability or inequity. HOME OF MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY GATEWAY TO YELLOWSTONE PARK 187 Hydrant Elevation: 5017.16 GIS Hydrant # Available Flow (gpm) Residual Pressure (psi) Residual Pressure (ft) 2108 0 40.03 92.47 200 39.59 91.45 400 39.01 90.11 600 38.34 88.57 800 37.56 86.76 1,000.00 36.64 84.64 1,200.00 35.56 82.14 1,400.00 34.34 79.33 1,600.00 32.98 76.18 1,800.00 31.49 72.74 2,000.00 29.86 68.98 2,200.00 28.11 64.93 2,400.00 26.22 60.57 2,600.00 24.21 55.93 2,800.00 22.07 50.98 3,000.00 19.81 45.76 3,200.00 17.42 40.24 3,400.00 14.92 34.47 3,600.00 12.29 28.39 3,800.00 9.55 22.06 4,000.00 6.68 15.43 4,200.00 3.7 8.55 4,400.00 0.61 1.41 4,438.57 0 0.00 Hydrant Curve 188 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 Residual Pressure (psi) Available Flow (gpm) Hydrant Curve 2108 Data Disclaimer: Water distribution information is calculated using hydraulic modeling software and is subject to variation. Actual field conditions may vary. This information is provided to the requestor for evaluation purposes only, without warranty of any kind, including, but not limited to any expressed or implied warranty arising by contract, stature, or law. In no event regardless of cause, shall the City be liable for any direct, indirect, special, punitive or consequential damages of any kind whether such damages arise under contract, tort, strict liability or inequity. 189 Hydrant Elevation: 4998.63 GIS Hydrant # Available Flow (gpm) Residual Pressure (psi) Residual Head (ft) 2112 0 47.21 109.06 200 46.67 107.81 400 45.86 105.94 600 44.82 103.53 800 43.55 100.60 1,000.00 42.02 97.07 1,200.00 40.22 92.91 1,400.00 38.18 88.20 1,600.00 35.88 82.88 1,800.00 33.35 77.04 2,000.00 30.58 70.64 2,200.00 27.58 63.71 2,400.00 24.34 56.23 2,600.00 20.88 48.23 2,800.00 17.2 39.73 3,000.00 13.3 30.72 3,200.00 9.18 21.21 3,400.00 4.84 11.18 3,600.00 0.29 0.67 3,612.29 0 0.00 Hydrant Curve 190 ‐10 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Residual Pressure (psi) Available Flow (gpm) Hydrant Curve 2112 Data Disclaimer: Water distribution information is calculated using hydraulic modeling software and is subject to variation. Actual field conditions may vary. This information is provided to the requestor for evaluation purposes only, without warranty of any kind, including, but not limited to any expressed or implied warranty arising by contract, stature, or law. In no event regardless of cause, shall the City be liable for any direct, indirect, special, punitive or consequential damages of any kind whether such damages arise under contract, tort, strict liability or inequity. 191 E APPENDIX E WATERCAD RESULTS 192 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Network Schematic Overall Schematic - Time: 0.00 hours P-11(2) P-11(3) P-10(3) P-10(2) P-4(3) P-4(1) P-5(2) P-4(2) P-5(1) P-38 P-22 P-39 P-47 P-15 P-11(1) P-14(2) P-14(1) P-3 P-2 P-1 P-10(1) P-42 P-41 P-32 P-29 P-28 P-27 P-26 P-24 J-14 J-13 J-26 J-12 J-27 J-11 J-40 J-10 J-9 J-38 J-7 J-41 J-6 J-5 J-4 J-39 J-3 J-2 J-1 J-25 J-36 J-24 J-37 J-34 J-23 J-35 J-22 J-31 J-21 J-32 J-20 J-33 J-19 J-42 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Reservoir Table - Time: 0.00 hours Hydraulic Grade (ft) Flow (Out net) (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? R-1 SUPPLY - HYD 2112 False 4,998.63 72 4,998.63 R-3 SUPPLY - HYD 2108 True 5,017.16 (N/A) (N/A) Pump Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pump Head (ft) Flow (Total) (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (Discharge) (ft) Hydraulic Grade (Suction) (ft) Downstream Pipe Status (Initial) Elevation Pump Definition (ft) Label Notes PMP-1 HYD 2112 4,998.63 Hydrant2112 On P-38 4,998.63 5,106.82 72 108.19 PMP-2 HYD 2108 5,017.16 Hydrant2108 On P-41 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 2 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 194 Pump: PMP-1 at time 00:00:00.00 Relative Speed Factor: 1.000 Pump Status: On Scenario: ADD Head Head operating point Head (ft) 110.00 100.00 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 Flow (gpm) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 195 Pump: PMP-2 at time 00:00:00.00 Relative Speed Factor: 1.000 Pump Status: On Scenario: Calibration-H-8 Head Head operating point Efficiency Efficiency operating point Head (ft) 90.00 80.00 70.00 60.00 50.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00 Efficiency (%) 100.0 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Flow (gpm) 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 196 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-23 True 5,017.16 0 5,106.80 39 J-21 True 5,008.42 0 5,106.80 43 J-20 True 5,008.20 0 5,106.80 43 J-22 True 5,008.00 0 5,106.80 43 J-14 True 5,007.62 0 5,106.80 43 J-19 True 5,006.63 0 5,106.79 43 J-18 True 5,006.50 0 5,106.79 43 J-16 True 5,006.13 0 5,106.79 44 J-36 BLDG-9 True 5,005.99 5 5,106.80 44 J-15 True 5,005.44 0 5,106.79 44 J-40 BLDG-8 True 5,004.94 5 5,106.80 44 J-33 BLDG-13 True 5,004.56 6 5,106.79 44 J-34 BLDG-11 True 5,004.43 5 5,106.79 44 J-32 BLDG-12 True 5,003.53 6 5,106.79 45 J-17 True 5,002.36 0 5,106.79 45 J-25 True 5,001.92 0 5,106.80 45 J-11 True 5,001.60 0 5,106.79 46 J-13 True 5,001.59 0 5,106.80 46 J-41 BLDG-7 True 5,001.02 6 5,106.79 46 J-37 BLDG-5 True 5,001.00 6 5,106.79 46 J-28 BDLG-3 True 5,000.86 6 5,106.79 46 J-35 BLDG-10 True 5,000.83 6 5,106.79 46 J-30 CLUBHOUSE True 5,000.73 0 5,106.79 46 J-12 True 5,000.49 0 5,106.79 46 J-31 BLDG-1 True 5,000.18 5 5,106.79 46 J-29 BLDG-2 True 4,999.21 5 5,106.79 47 J-39 BLDG-6 True 4,998.79 5 5,106.80 47 J-1 True 4,998.63 0 5,106.82 47 J-2 True 4,998.32 0 5,106.81 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 3 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 197 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-3 True 4,997.69 0 5,106.81 47 J-5 True 4,997.34 0 5,106.79 47 J-9 True 4,997.23 0 5,106.80 47 J-27 True 4,997.20 0 5,106.79 47 J-10 True 4,997.19 0 5,106.79 47 J-38 BDLG-4 True 4,997.09 5 5,106.80 47 J-6 True 4,997.08 0 5,106.79 47 J-24 True 4,996.83 0 5,106.79 48 J-4 True 4,996.74 0 5,106.80 48 J-7 True 4,996.43 0 5,106.80 48 J-26 True 4,996.43 0 5,106.80 48 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 4 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 198 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Hydrant Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Demand Demand Collection (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Is Active? H-1 True 4,997.28 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-2 True 4,996.55 0 <Collection: 1 item> 48 H-3 True 4,997.41 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-4 True 4,996.59 0 <Collection: 1 item> 48 H-5 True 5,001.83 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-6 True 5,000.24 0 <Collection: 1 item> 46 H-7 True 5,002.36 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-8 True 5,006.38 0 <Collection: 1 item> 43 H-9 True 5,005.21 0 <Collection: 1 item> 44 H-10 True 5,007.93 0 <Collection: 1 item> 43 H-11 True 4,998.15 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 5 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 199 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-1 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 49 0.28 111 False 0 P-2 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 49 0.28 23 False 0 P-3 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 49 0.28 236 False 0 P-4(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 22 0.12 274 False 0 P-4(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 17 0.10 110 False 0 P-4(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 17 0.10 307 False 0 P-5(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 357 False 0 P-5(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 38 False 0 P-6 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-8 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-9(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 17 0.10 131 False 0 P-9(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 12 0.07 68 False 0 P-9(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 7 0.04 39 False 0 P-9(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 7 0.04 61 False 0 P-10(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 1 0.01 204 False 0 P-10(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -5 0.03 8 False 0 P-10(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -11 0.06 95 False 0 P-11(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -11 0.06 177 False 0 P-11(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -17 0.10 8 False 0 P-11(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -23 0.13 197 False 0 P-12(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 27 0.15 126 False 0 P-12(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 22 0.12 173 False 0 P-13(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1 0.01 25 False 0 P-13(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1 0.01 149 False 0 P-13(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -7 0.04 133 False 0 P-14(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 16 0.09 284 False 0 P-14(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 11 0.06 96 False 0 P-15 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 11 0.06 308 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 6 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 200 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-16 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 6 0.03 43 False 0 P-17(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 6 0.03 82 False 0 P-17(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 63 False 0 P-17(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -5 0.03 9 False 0 P-17(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -11 0.06 110 False 0 P-18 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-19 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-20 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-21 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-22 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -23 0.13 266 False 0 P-23 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -23 0.13 292 False 0 P-24 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 27 False 0 P-25 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-26 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 15 False 0 P-27 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-28 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-29 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-30 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 16 False 0 P-31 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-32 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 26 False 0 P-33 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-34 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-36 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-37 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-38 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -72 0.02 18 True 1 P-39 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -72 0.02 16 True 1 P-41 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 30 False 0 P-42 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 42 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 7 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 201 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Average Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-48 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 23 0.13 1,105 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 8 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 202 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Reservoir Table - Time: 0.00 hours Hydraulic Grade (ft) Flow (Out net) (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? R-1 SUPPLY - HYD 2112 False 4,998.63 166 4,998.63 R-3 SUPPLY - HYD 2108 True 5,017.16 (N/A) (N/A) Pump Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pump Head (ft) Flow (Total) (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (Discharge) (ft) Hydraulic Grade (Suction) (ft) Downstream Pipe Status (Initial) Elevation Pump Definition (ft) Label Notes PMP-1 HYD 2112 4,998.63 Hydrant2112 On P-38 4,998.63 5,106.47 166 107.84 PMP-2 HYD 2108 5,017.16 Hydrant2108 On P-41 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 9 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 203 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-23 True 5,017.16 0 5,106.40 39 J-21 True 5,008.42 0 5,106.37 42 J-20 True 5,008.20 0 5,106.37 42 J-22 True 5,008.00 0 5,106.38 43 J-14 True 5,007.62 0 5,106.37 43 J-19 True 5,006.63 0 5,106.35 43 J-18 True 5,006.50 0 5,106.35 43 J-16 True 5,006.13 0 5,106.35 43 J-36 BLDG-9 True 5,005.99 11 5,106.36 43 J-15 True 5,005.44 0 5,106.36 44 J-40 BLDG-8 True 5,004.94 13 5,106.37 44 J-33 BLDG-13 True 5,004.56 14 5,106.35 44 J-34 BLDG-11 True 5,004.43 11 5,106.35 44 J-32 BLDG-12 True 5,003.53 14 5,106.35 44 J-17 True 5,002.36 0 5,106.35 45 J-25 True 5,001.92 0 5,106.37 45 J-11 True 5,001.60 0 5,106.35 45 J-13 True 5,001.59 0 5,106.37 45 J-41 BLDG-7 True 5,001.02 14 5,106.35 46 J-37 BLDG-5 True 5,001.00 14 5,106.35 46 J-28 BDLG-3 True 5,000.86 14 5,106.35 46 J-35 BLDG-10 True 5,000.83 14 5,106.35 46 J-30 CLUBHOUSE True 5,000.73 1 5,106.35 46 J-12 True 5,000.49 0 5,106.35 46 J-31 BLDG-1 True 5,000.18 11 5,106.35 46 J-29 BLDG-2 True 4,999.21 11 5,106.35 46 J-39 BLDG-6 True 4,998.79 13 5,106.38 47 J-1 True 4,998.63 0 5,106.47 47 J-2 True 4,998.32 0 5,106.45 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 10 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 204 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-3 True 4,997.69 0 5,106.44 47 J-5 True 4,997.34 0 5,106.36 47 J-9 True 4,997.23 0 5,106.37 47 J-27 True 4,997.20 0 5,106.36 47 J-10 True 4,997.19 0 5,106.36 47 J-38 BDLG-4 True 4,997.09 11 5,106.37 47 J-6 True 4,997.08 0 5,106.36 47 J-24 True 4,996.83 0 5,106.36 47 J-4 True 4,996.74 0 5,106.39 47 J-7 True 4,996.43 0 5,106.39 48 J-26 True 4,996.43 0 5,106.39 48 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 11 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 205 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Hydrant Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Demand Demand Collection (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Is Active? H-1 True 4,997.28 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-2 True 4,996.55 0 <Collection: 1 item> 48 H-3 True 4,997.41 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-4 True 4,996.59 0 <Collection: 1 item> 48 H-5 True 5,001.83 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-6 True 5,000.24 0 <Collection: 1 item> 46 H-7 True 5,002.36 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-8 True 5,006.38 0 <Collection: 1 item> 43 H-9 True 5,005.21 0 <Collection: 1 item> 44 H-10 True 5,007.93 0 <Collection: 1 item> 43 H-11 True 4,998.15 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 12 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 206 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-1 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 113 0.64 111 False 0 P-2 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 113 0.64 23 False 0 P-3 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 113 0.64 236 False 0 P-4(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 50 0.29 274 False 0 P-4(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 39 0.22 110 False 0 P-4(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 39 0.22 307 False 0 P-5(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 357 False 0 P-5(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 38 False 0 P-6 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-8 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-9(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 39 0.22 131 False 0 P-9(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 28 0.16 68 False 0 P-9(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 16 0.09 39 False 0 P-9(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 15 0.09 61 False 0 P-10(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 2 0.01 204 False 0 P-10(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -11 0.06 8 False 0 P-10(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -25 0.14 95 False 0 P-11(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -25 0.14 177 False 0 P-11(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -39 0.22 8 False 0 P-11(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -53 0.30 197 False 0 P-12(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 62 0.35 126 False 0 P-12(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 50 0.28 173 False 0 P-13(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -3 0.02 25 False 0 P-13(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -3 0.02 149 False 0 P-13(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -16 0.09 133 False 0 P-14(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 38 0.21 284 False 0 P-14(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 26 0.15 96 False 0 P-15 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 26 0.15 308 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 13 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 207 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-16 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 13 0.07 43 False 0 P-17(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 13 0.07 82 False 0 P-17(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1 0.01 63 False 0 P-17(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -12 0.07 9 False 0 P-17(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -26 0.15 110 False 0 P-18 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-19 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-20 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-21 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-22 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -53 0.30 266 False 0 P-23 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -53 0.30 292 False 0 P-24 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 27 False 0 P-25 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-26 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 15 False 0 P-27 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-28 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-29 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-30 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 16 False 0 P-31 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-32 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 26 False 0 P-33 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-34 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-36 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-37 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-38 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -166 0.04 18 True 1 P-39 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -166 0.04 16 True 1 P-41 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 30 False 0 P-42 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 42 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 14 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 208 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Maximum Daily Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-48 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 53 0.30 1,105 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 15 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 209 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Reservoir Table - Time: 0.00 hours Hydraulic Grade (ft) Flow (Out net) (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? R-1 SUPPLY - HYD 2112 False 4,998.63 217 4,998.63 R-3 SUPPLY - HYD 2108 True 5,017.16 (N/A) (N/A) Pump Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pump Head (ft) Flow (Total) (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (Discharge) (ft) Hydraulic Grade (Suction) (ft) Downstream Pipe Status (Initial) Elevation Pump Definition (ft) Label Notes PMP-1 HYD 2112 4,998.63 Hydrant2112 On P-38 4,998.63 5,106.20 217 107.57 PMP-2 HYD 2108 5,017.16 Hydrant2108 On P-41 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 16 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 210 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-23 True 5,017.16 0 5,105.81 38 J-21 True 5,008.42 0 5,105.81 42 J-20 True 5,008.20 0 5,105.81 42 J-22 True 5,008.00 0 5,105.81 42 J-14 True 5,007.62 0 5,105.81 42 J-19 True 5,006.63 0 5,105.80 43 J-18 True 5,006.50 0 5,105.80 43 J-16 True 5,006.13 0 5,105.80 43 J-36 BLDG-9 True 5,005.99 15 5,105.80 43 J-15 True 5,005.44 0 5,105.80 43 J-40 BLDG-8 True 5,004.94 16 5,105.81 44 J-33 BLDG-13 True 5,004.56 18 5,105.80 44 J-34 BLDG-11 True 5,004.43 15 5,105.80 44 J-32 BLDG-12 True 5,003.53 18 5,105.80 44 J-17 True 5,002.36 0 5,105.80 45 J-25 True 5,001.92 0 5,105.82 45 J-11 True 5,001.60 0 5,105.80 45 J-13 True 5,001.59 0 5,105.82 45 J-41 BLDG-7 True 5,001.02 18 5,105.81 45 J-37 BLDG-5 True 5,001.00 18 5,105.81 45 J-28 BDLG-3 True 5,000.86 18 5,105.80 45 J-35 BLDG-10 True 5,000.83 18 5,105.80 45 J-30 CLUBHOUSE True 5,000.73 1 5,105.81 45 J-12 True 5,000.49 0 5,105.80 46 J-31 BLDG-1 True 5,000.18 15 5,105.81 46 J-29 BLDG-2 True 4,999.21 15 5,105.81 46 J-39 BLDG-6 True 4,998.79 16 5,105.87 46 J-1 True 4,998.63 0 5,106.20 47 J-2 True 4,998.32 0 5,106.11 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 17 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 211 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-3 True 4,997.69 0 5,106.09 47 J-5 True 4,997.34 0 5,105.82 47 J-9 True 4,997.23 0 5,105.86 47 J-27 True 4,997.20 0 5,105.82 47 J-10 True 4,997.19 0 5,105.82 47 J-38 BDLG-4 True 4,997.09 15 5,105.87 47 J-6 True 4,997.08 0 5,105.82 47 J-24 True 4,996.83 0 5,105.82 47 J-4 True 4,996.74 0 5,105.91 47 J-7 True 4,996.43 0 5,105.91 47 J-26 True 4,996.43 0 5,105.91 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 18 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 212 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Hydrant Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Demand Demand Collection (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Is Active? H-1 True 4,997.28 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-2 True 4,996.55 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-3 True 4,997.41 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-4 True 4,996.59 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 H-5 True 5,001.83 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-6 True 5,000.24 0 <Collection: 1 item> 46 H-7 True 5,002.36 0 <Collection: 1 item> 45 H-8 True 5,006.38 0 <Collection: 1 item> 43 H-9 True 5,005.21 0 <Collection: 1 item> 44 H-10 True 5,007.93 0 <Collection: 1 item> 42 H-11 True 4,998.15 0 <Collection: 1 item> 47 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 19 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 213 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-1 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 217 1.22 111 False 0 P-2 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 217 1.22 23 False 0 P-3 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 217 1.22 236 False 0 P-4(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 86 0.49 274 False 0 P-4(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 71 0.40 110 False 0 P-4(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 71 0.40 307 False 0 P-5(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 357 False 0 P-5(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 38 False 0 P-6 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-8 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-9(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 71 0.40 131 False 0 P-9(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 56 0.32 68 False 0 P-9(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 41 0.23 39 False 0 P-9(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 40 0.22 61 False 0 P-10(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 8 0.04 204 False 0 P-10(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -10 0.06 8 False 0 P-10(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -28 0.16 95 False 0 P-11(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -28 0.16 177 False 0 P-11(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -46 0.26 8 False 0 P-11(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -64 0.36 197 False 0 P-12(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 131 0.74 126 False 0 P-12(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 114 0.65 173 False 0 P-13(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 50 0.28 25 False 0 P-13(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 50 0.28 149 False 0 P-13(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 34 0.19 133 False 0 P-14(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 34 0.19 284 False 0 P-14(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 19 0.11 96 False 0 P-15 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 19 0.11 308 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 20 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 214 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-16 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 32 0.18 43 False 0 P-17(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 32 0.18 82 False 0 P-17(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 14 0.08 63 False 0 P-17(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1 0.01 9 False 0 P-17(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -19 0.11 110 False 0 P-18 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-19 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-20 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-21 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-22 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 266 False 0 P-23 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 292 False 0 P-24 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 27 False 0 P-25 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-26 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 15 False 0 P-27 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-28 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-29 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-30 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 16 False 0 P-31 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-32 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 26 False 0 P-33 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-34 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-36 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-37 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-38 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -217 0.06 18 True 1 P-39 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 -217 0.06 16 True 1 P-41 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 30 False 0 P-42 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 42 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 21 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 215 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Peak Hour Demand Scenario Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-48 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 (N/A) (N/A) 1,105 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 22 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 216 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Reservoir Table - Time: 0.00 hours Hydraulic Grade (ft) Flow (Out net) (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? R-1 SUPPLY - HYD 2112 False 4,998.63 (N/A) (N/A) R-3 SUPPLY - HYD 2108 True 5,017.16 1,666 5,017.16 Pump Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pump Head (ft) Flow (Total) (gpm) Hydraulic Grade (Discharge) (ft) Hydraulic Grade (Suction) (ft) Downstream Pipe Status (Initial) Elevation Pump Definition (ft) Label Notes PMP-1 HYD 2112 4,998.63 Hydrant2112 On P-38 (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) (N/A) PMP-2 HYD 2108 5,017.16 Hydrant2108 On P-41 5,017.16 5,092.36 1,666 75.20 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 23 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 217 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-23 True 5,017.16 0 5,092.36 33 J-21 True 5,008.42 0 5,083.97 33 J-20 True 5,008.20 0 5,083.97 33 J-22 True 5,008.00 0 5,087.97 35 J-14 True 5,007.62 0 5,083.97 33 J-19 True 5,006.63 0 5,077.89 31 J-18 True 5,006.50 0 5,077.89 31 J-16 True 5,006.13 0 5,078.61 31 J-36 BLDG-9 True 5,005.99 11 5,081.72 33 J-15 True 5,005.44 0 5,080.98 33 J-40 BLDG-8 True 5,004.94 13 5,083.76 34 J-33 BLDG-13 True 5,004.56 14 5,079.52 32 J-34 BLDG-11 True 5,004.43 11 5,079.60 33 J-32 BLDG-12 True 5,003.53 14 5,080.15 33 J-17 True 5,002.36 0 5,080.90 34 J-25 True 5,001.92 0 5,083.55 35 J-11 True 5,001.60 0 5,081.29 34 J-13 True 5,001.59 0 5,083.51 35 J-41 BLDG-7 True 5,001.02 14 5,082.80 35 J-37 BLDG-5 True 5,001.00 14 5,082.78 35 J-28 BDLG-3 True 5,000.86 14 5,081.88 35 J-35 BLDG-10 True 5,000.83 14 5,081.90 35 J-30 CLUBHOUSE True 5,000.73 1 5,081.42 35 J-12 True 5,000.49 0 5,082.21 35 J-31 BLDG-1 True 5,000.18 11 5,081.51 35 J-29 BLDG-2 True 4,999.21 11 5,081.66 36 J-39 BLDG-6 True 4,998.79 13 5,083.62 37 J-1 True 4,998.63 0 5,085.71 38 J-2 True 4,998.32 0 5,085.11 38 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 24 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 218 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Junction Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Hydraulic Grade (ft) Demand (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Notes Is Active? J-3 True 4,997.69 0 5,084.99 38 J-5 True 4,997.34 0 5,081.98 37 J-9 True 4,997.23 0 5,082.73 37 J-27 True 4,997.20 0 5,081.98 37 J-10 True 4,997.19 0 5,081.98 37 J-38 BDLG-4 True 4,997.09 11 5,083.00 37 J-6 True 4,997.08 0 5,081.98 37 J-24 True 4,996.83 0 5,081.98 37 J-4 True 4,996.74 0 5,083.71 38 J-7 True 4,996.43 0 5,083.71 38 J-26 True 4,996.43 0 5,083.71 38 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 25 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 219 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Hydrant Table - Time: 0.00 hours Pressure (psi) Demand Demand Collection (gpm) Elevation (ft) Label Is Active? H-1 True 4,997.28 0 <Collection: 1 item> 37 H-2 True 4,996.55 0 <Collection: 1 item> 37 H-3 True 4,997.41 0 <Collection: 1 item> 37 H-4 True 4,996.59 0 <Collection: 1 item> 38 H-5 True 5,001.83 0 <Collection: 1 item> 35 H-6 True 5,000.24 0 <Collection: 1 item> 35 H-7 True 5,002.36 0 <Collection: 1 item> 34 H-8 True 5,006.38 1,500 <Collection: 1 item> 30 H-9 True 5,005.21 0 <Collection: 1 item> 33 H-10 True 5,007.93 0 <Collection: 1 item> 33 H-11 True 4,998.15 0 <Collection: 1 item> 38 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 26 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 220 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-1 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 609 3.45 111 False 0 P-2 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 609 3.45 23 False 0 P-3 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 609 3.45 236 False 0 P-4(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 407 2.30 274 False 0 P-4(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 396 2.24 110 False 0 P-4(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 396 2.24 307 False 0 P-5(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 357 False 0 P-5(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 38 False 0 P-6 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-8 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-9(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 396 2.24 131 False 0 P-9(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 384 2.17 68 False 0 P-9(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 373 2.11 39 False 0 P-9(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 372 2.10 61 False 0 P-10(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -432 2.44 204 False 0 P-10(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -446 2.52 8 False 0 P-10(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -459 2.60 95 False 0 P-11(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -459 2.60 177 False 0 P-11(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -473 2.68 8 False 0 P-11(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -487 2.75 197 False 0 P-12(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 202 1.14 126 False 0 P-12(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 189 1.07 173 False 0 P-13(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -298 1.68 25 False 0 P-13(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -298 1.68 149 False 0 P-13(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -310 1.75 133 False 0 P-14(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 747 4.22 284 False 0 P-14(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 735 4.16 96 False 0 P-15 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 735 4.16 308 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 27 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 221 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-16 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 804 4.54 43 False 0 P-17(1) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 804 4.54 82 False 0 P-17(2) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 790 4.47 63 False 0 P-17(3) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 779 4.40 9 False 0 P-17(4) True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 765 4.32 110 False 0 P-18 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 1,500 8.48 25 False 0 P-19 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-20 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 25 False 0 P-21 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 10 False 0 P-22 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1,057 5.98 266 False 0 P-23 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -1,057 5.98 292 False 0 P-24 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 27 False 0 P-25 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-26 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 15 False 0 P-27 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 1,500 14.96 17 False 0 P-28 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-29 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-30 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 16 False 0 P-31 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-32 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 26 False 0 P-33 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 17 False 0 P-34 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-36 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 11 False 0 P-37 True 6.4 Ductile Iron 130.0 0 0.00 14 False 0 P-38 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 18 True 1 P-39 False 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 (N/A) (N/A) 16 True 1 P-41 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 1,666 0.43 30 False 0 P-42 True 40.0 Ductile Iron 200.0 1,666 0.43 42 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 28 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 222 Buffalo Run Water Model Report MDD + Fire Flow (H-8) Pipe Table - Time: 0.00 hours Length (User Defined) (ft) Has User Defined Length? Length (Scaled) (ft) Velocity (ft/s) Flow (gpm) Hazen-Williams C Diameter Material (in) Label Is Active? P-48 True 8.5 Ductile Iron 130.0 -609 3.45 1,105 False 0 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 29 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 223 Buffalo Run Water Model Report Automated Fire Flow Results Fire Flow Report - Time: 0.00 hours Is Fire Flow Run Balanced? Junction w/ Minimum Pressure (System) Pressure (Calculated Residual) (psi) Pressure (Residual Lower Limit) (psi) Satisfies Fire Flow Constraints? Fire Flow (Available) (gpm) Fire Flow (Needed) (gpm) Fire Flow Iterations Label Zone H-1 <None> 3 0 2,204 True 0 20 J-19 True H-2 <None> 3 0 2,311 True 0 20 J-19 True H-3 <None> 3 0 1,926 True 0 20 J-6 True H-4 <None> 3 0 2,381 True 0 20 J-19 True H-5 <None> 3 0 2,384 True 0 20 J-21 True H-6 <None> 3 0 2,257 True 0 20 J-12 True H-7 <None> 3 0 2,236 True 0 20 J-19 True H-8 <None> 3 0 2,064 True 0 20 J-19 True H-9 <None> 3 0 2,160 True 0 20 J-15 True H-10 <None> 3 0 2,263 True 0 20 J-21 True H-11 <None> 3 0 2,396 True 0 20 J-2 True 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 30 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 224 F APPENDIX F NRCS SOILS REPORT 225 United States Department of Agriculture A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Gallatin County Area, Montana Buffalo Run Natural Resources Conservation Service July 20, 2020226 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nrcs) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nrcs142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 227 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 228 Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 How Soil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 Soil Map.................................................................................................................. 8 Soil Map................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 Map Unit Legend................................................................................................ 11 Map Unit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 Gallatin County Area, Montana.......................................................................13 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................................................................................................13 457A—Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes....................... 15 510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes......................................16 References............................................................................................................18 4 229 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil-vegetation-landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 230 scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components; the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil-landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil-landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field-observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and Custom Soil Resource Report 6 231 identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. Custom Soil Resource Report 7 232 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 8 233 9 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 5054430 5054480 5054530 5054580 5054630 5054680 5054730 5054430 5054480 5054530 5054580 5054630 5054680 5054730 493480 493530 493580 493630 493680 493730 493780 493830 493880 493930 493480 493530 493580 493630 493680 493730 493780 493830 493880 493930 45° 38' 46'' N 111° 5' 2'' W 45° 38' 46'' N 111° 4' 39'' W 45° 38' 35'' N 111° 5' 2'' W 45° 38' 35'' N 111° 4' 39'' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 12N WGS84 0 100 200 400 600 Feet 0 30 60 120 180 Meters Map Scale: 1:2,220 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. 234 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 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 448A Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 5.8 27.8% 457A Turner loam, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes 13.6 65.2% 510B Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes 1.4 7.0% Totals for Area of Interest 20.8 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions 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, 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 Custom Soil Resource Report 11 236 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. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 12 237 Gallatin County Area, Montana 448A—Hyalite-Beaverton complex, moderately wet, 0 to 2 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56sq Elevation: 4,450 to 5,300 feet 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: Farmland of local importance Map Unit Composition Hyalite and similar soils: 70 percent Beaverton and similar soils: 20 percent Minor components: 10 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Hyalite Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Loamy alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: loam Bt1 - 5 to 9 inches: clay loam Bt2 - 9 to 17 inches: silty clay loam 2Bt3 - 17 to 26 inches: very cobbly sandy clay loam 3C - 26 to 60 inches: very cobbly 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 (0.20 to 0.57 in/hr) Depth to water table: About 48 to 96 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Calcium carbonate, maximum in profile: 5 percent Available water storage in profile: Low (about 4.4 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 3e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043BP818MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 13 238 Description of Beaverton Setting Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Typical profile A - 0 to 5 inches: cobbly loam Bt - 5 to 21 inches: very gravelly clay loam Bk - 21 to 25 inches: very cobbly coarse sandy loam 2Bk - 25 to 60 inches: extremely cobbly loamy coarse 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 3.7 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 4s Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 6s Hydrologic Soil Group: B Ecological site: Upland Grassland (R043BP818MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components 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 Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Stream terraces, alluvial fans Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 14 239 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 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: Loamy (Lo) LRU 44B-B (R044BB032MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 15 240 Minor Components 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 Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) 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 510B—Meadowcreek loam, 0 to 4 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol: 56vt Elevation: 4,200 to 5,950 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: Prime farmland if irrigated Map Unit Composition Meadowcreek and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Meadowcreek Setting Landform: Stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Parent material: Alluvium Custom Soil Resource Report 16 241 Typical profile A - 0 to 11 inches: loam Bg - 11 to 25 inches: silt loam 2C - 25 to 60 inches: very gravelly sand Properties and qualities Slope: 0 to 4 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class: Somewhat poorly 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 24 to 42 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline to slightly saline (0.0 to 4.0 mmhos/cm) Available water storage in profile: Low (about 5.1 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated): 2e Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 3e Hydrologic Soil Group: C Ecological site: Subirrigated (Sb) LRU 44B-Y (R044BY150MT) Hydric soil rating: No Minor Components Blossberg Percent of map unit: 10 percent Landform: Terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Wet Meadow (WM) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS365MT) Hydric soil rating: Yes Beaverton Percent of map unit: 5 percent Landform: Alluvial fans, stream terraces Down-slope shape: Linear Across-slope shape: Linear Ecological site: Shallow to Gravel (SwGr) 15-19" p.z. (R044XS354MT) Hydric soil rating: No Custom Soil Resource Report 17 242 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep-water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/?cid=nrcs142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nrcs142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 18 243 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 430-VI. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nrcs/detail/soils/scientists/?cid=nrcs142p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/detail/national/soils/? cid=nrcs142p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nrcs142p2_052290.pdf Custom Soil Resource Report 19 244 G APPENDIX G GEOTECHNICAL REPORT 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 2880 Technology Boulevard West • Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-0721 • www.m-m.net Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana July 2020 Prepared For: Yellowstone Investment Group, PLLC PO Box 697 Evergreen, CO 80437 MMI Project No. 6475.002.00 277 278 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana Table of Contents | i Table of Contents Purpose of Report and Study Objectives ................................... 1 Proposed Development ........................ 1 Development Description ................................ 1 Development Horizon ...................................... 1 Existing Area Conditions ...................... 4 Study Area ...................................................... 4 Area of Influence.................................... 4 Study Area Land Use ............................. 4 Transportation Network ................................... 4 Study Area Roadway ............................. 4 Fowler Lane .............................................. 4 Study Area Intersections ........................ 6 South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive .............. 6 Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road ............... 6 Existing Study Area Transportation System ........................... 7 Traffic Volumes ...................................... 7 South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive .............. 8 Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road ............... 9 Estimated 2020 Existing Traffic Volumes .. 9 Pedestrians & Bicyclists ......................... 9 Transit Service ....................................... 9 Projected Traffic.................................... 9 Subdivision Traffic .......................................... 9 Development Trip Generation ................ 9 Development Trip Distribution .............. 11 Trip Assignment ................................... 12 Pedestrians & Bicyclists ................................ 12 Transit Service.............................................. 12 Non-Site Traffic............................................. 12 Method of Projection ............................ 12 Total Traffic .................................................. 16 Transportation Analyses .................... 16 Methodologies .............................................. 16 Study Scenarios ................................... 16 Analysis Methodologies ....................... 16 Two-Way Stop-Controlled (TWSC) Intersections .............................. 18 All-Way Stop-Controlled (AWSC) Intersections .............................. 18 Capacity & Level of Service Analyses ........... 18 Findings ............................................... 18 Need for Any Improvements ......................... 18 Pedestrians & Bicyclists ................................ 22 Transit Service.............................................. 22 Conclusions & Recommendations ... 22 Interior Roadways & Intersections ................ 22 Pedestrian & Bicyclist Connectivity ............... 23 Traffic Control Guidance ............................... 23 References ........................................... 24 279 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana ii | Appendices Appendices Appendix A Level of Service Concepts, Analysis Methodologies, & Standards of Significance Appendix B Trip Generation Analyses Appendix C Capacity & Level of Service Analyses C-1: Estimated 2020 Current Daily Traffic C-2: Estimated 2025 Background Traffic C-3: Estimated 2025 Total Traffic 280 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana List of Figures & Tables | iii List of Figures Figure 1: Proposed Development Location ....................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Proposed Site Layout .......................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3: Existing Study Area Intersections Traffic Control ............................................................. 7 Figure 4: Estimated Current Daily Traffic ......................................................................................... 11 Figure 5: Primary Trip Distribution ................................................................................................... 12 Figure 6: Buffalo Run Site Development Traffic Assignment ......................................................... 14 Figure 7: Estimated 2025 Background Traffic ................................................................................. 15 Figure 8: Estimated 2025 Total Traffic.............................................................................................. 17 Figure 9: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2020 Current Daily Traffic .......................... 19 Figure 10: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2025 Background Traffic ......................... 20 Figure 11: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2025 Total Traffic ..................................... 21 List of Tables Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation Summary for Meadow Creek Subdivision Lots Contributing to South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive.............................................................................. 8 Table 2: Estimated Buffalo Run Site Development Trip Generation Summary ............................. 11 281 282 283 Traffic Impact Study for Buffalo Run Site Development Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana 284 285 286 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 1 Purpose of Report and Study Objectives This traffic impact study summarizes the potential impacts from the proposed Buffalo Run site development to be located in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The information presented in this report is intended to evaluate the safety and operational aspects of the area transportation system, providing guidance with respect to its short- and long term function, under existing conditions as well as with estimated impacts from the proposed development. Proposed Development Development Description The proposed Buffalo Run site development is to be located in Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana on the north half of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian of Montana. Generally, the property is bordered by Fowler Lane to the west, portions of Meadow Creek Subdivision to the east, and agricultural lands to the north and south. The development location is depicted in Figure 1 on the following page. The proposed site layout is shown in Figure 2 on page 3. The proposed project is to include 288 residential condominium units and a community building that is for the private use of residents and their invited guests. The proposed Buffalo Run site development is estimated to generate a total of 2,138 average weekday trips as well as 130 and 151 trips during the average weekday AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Access to and from the proposed development include connections to Kurk Drive and South 31st Avenue. Development Horizon Full build-out and occupancy of the proposed development is estimated to occur over the course of the next five (5) years based on current development trends in the area and the size of the proposed project. Therefore, this study will assess any impacts the developments may have on the area transportation system through the year 2025. 287 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 2 Figure 1: Proposed Development Location 288 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 3 Figure 2: Proposed Site Layout 289 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 4 Existing Area Conditions Study Area Area of Influence The transportation impacts from a development are largely dependent on its location and size as well as the characteristics of the surrounding transportation system. The significant impacts to the adjacent transportation system will generally be within a limited area from the site. The proposed Buffalo Run residential condominium project is not significantly large in size from a traffic generation standpoint, having fewer than 200 estimated trips during both the weekday AM and PM peak hours. Therefore, it is not anticipated that the development would have significant impacts beyond the proposed site accesses and key intersections within proximity to the proposed project. Study Area Land Use Presently, the proposed site is a single-family residence with some agricultural use. As stated previously, the property is bordered by Fowler Lane to the west, portions of Meadow Creek Subdivision to the east, and agricultural lands to the north and south. Across Fowler Lane to the west from the proposed development is existing agricultural land. Transportation Network The study area focuses on key intersections in the vicinity (within ½ mile of the site) of the proposed development. The traffic study analyzed the intersection of Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road because it is a key intersection within ½ mile. It should be noted, the current plan does not contemplate connecting to Fowler. The roadways and intersections included within this traffic impact study update are noted below: Study Area Roadway Fowler Lane Within the project study area, Fowler Lane is classified as a minor arterial roadway by the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan dated April 25, 2017 that was prepared by Robert Peccia & Associates and Alta Planning + Design. Presently, the segment adjacent to the proposed Buffalo Run site development is currently a two-lane, gravel roadway. It has a surface width of approximately 24 feet, which includes a single travel lane in each direction, northbound and southbound. The roadway links South 19th Road to the south and Stucky Road to the north. The posted speed limit on Fowler Lane within the study area is 35 mph. 290 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 5 291 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 6 Study Area Intersections  South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive  Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive The existing intersection of South 27th Avenue and Kurk Drive has the characteristics described in the following:  All-Way Stop-Controlled Intersection  Southbound (from the north) approach only includes the east half of the full collector roadway width for South 27th Avenue due to right-of-way constraints. The west half of the roadway may be completed in the future as development occurs adjacent to that segment.  Eastbound Approach (From the West) – (1) Left / Through / Right Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±150 ft (Measured to South 28th Avenue)  Westbound Approach (From the East) – (1) Left / Through / Right Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±100 ft (Measured to South 26th Avenue)  Northbound Approach (From the South) – (1) Left and (1) Through / Right Turn Lane  Existing Left Turn Lane Available Queue Storage = ±100 ft  Existing Through / Right Turn Lane Queue Storage = ±700 ft (Measured to Meah Lane)  Southbound Approach (From the North) – (1) Left / Through / Right Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±860 ft (Measured to Golden Sun Drive) Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road The intersection of Fowler Lane and Blackwood Road has the following characteristics:  Stop-Controlled, T-Intersection  Stop-Control on the Eastbound (From the West), Blackwood Road Approach  Eastbound Approach (From the West) – (1) Left / Right Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±100 ft (Measured to Driveway on North Side of Blackwood Road)  Northbound Approach (From the South) – (1) Through / Left Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±300 ft (Measured to Driveway on East Side of Fowler Lane)  Southbound Approach (From the North) – (1) Through / Right Turn Lane  Existing Available Queue Storage = ±575 ft (Measured to Driveway on East Side of Fowler Lane) 292 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 7 Existing Study Area Transportation System The existing study area roadways and intersections described above are shown in Figure 3 below. Included within the figure is the existing traffic control at each of the study area intersections as well as the traffic lane configurations. Figure 3: Existing Study Area Intersections Traffic Control Traffic Volumes Due to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, reliable counts of existing traffic volumes within the study area were not able to be obtained at the time of this study. Therefore, traffic data for the study area intersections were developed through vehicle trip generation projections and previous traffic modeling efforts. Specifically, estimated existing traffic volumes were developed for the study area intersections as described in the following sections. 293 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 8 South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive Due to the arrangement of streets within Meadow Creek Subdivision and limited access to South 19th Avenue, a total of 109 dwelling units that included the following blocks and lots within Meadow Creek Subdivision, Phases 1, 1A, and 1B were estimated to contribute vehicular traffic to the intersection of South 27th Avenue and Kurk Drive:  Block 9 | Lots 13 and 22-33  Block 12 | Lots 1-14  Block 10 | Lots 1-6, 7B, 8B, 9B, 10B-1, 11A-1, and 12-26  Block 13 | Lots 1-16  Block 11 | Lots 1-16  Block 14 | Lots 1-22 For the existing intersection of South 27th Avenue and Kurk Drive, estimated existing traffic data was derived from trip generation estimates for the lots noted above within Meadow Creek Subdivision using trip generation rates found in Trip Generation, 10th Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Average vehicle trip ends (Trip ends are defined as a single or one-directional travel movement with either the origin or the destination of the trip inside the study site.) were estimated based on dwelling units using Land Use Code 210 – Single-Family Detached Housing and Land Use Code 220 – Multifamily Housing : Low-Rise. The total estimated trip generation for the proposed development is provided in Table 1 below. Analyses are summarized in Appendix B. Table 1: Estimated Trip Generation Summary for Meadow Creek Subdivision Lots Contributing to South 27th Avenue & Kurk Drive Land Use Units Average Weekday Trips Average Weekday, AM Peak Hour Trips Average Weekday, PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Single-Family Detached Housing 106 549 549 1,098 20 60 80 67 40 107 Multifamily Housing: Low-Rise (Condominium / Townhouse) 3 11 11 22 0 2 2 1 1 2 Totals 109 560 560 1,120 20 62 82 68 41 109 Units = Dwelling Units Each of the lots within Meadow Creek Subdivision included as part of the analyses are projected to utilize South 27th Avenue and Kurk Drive for access to South 19th Avenue. Based on their location, each lot was modeled on the transportation network within Meadow Creek Subdivision in the study area to arrive at estimated average weekday traffic volumes for the intersection of South 27th Avenue and Kurk Drive for the AM and PM peak hours. 294 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 9 Fowler Lane & Blackwood Road Estimated existing traffic data for the intersection of Fowler Lane and Blackwood Road was derived from modeling completed as part of the Transportation Planning Study for South 27th Avenue & the Montana State University Innovation Campus prepared by Morrison-Maierle in June 2014. This data was derived from historic traffic counts and modeling completed as part of previous Bozeman area transportation planning efforts. To arrive at estimated 2020 traffic volumes for the average weekday, AM and PM peak hours estimated average annual traffic growth rate (AGR) percentages were applied to the model volumes as follows:  Fowler Lane | Estimated AGR = 14% (Estimated due to short timeframe and recent subdivision development in the area.)  Blackwood Road | Estimated AGR = 2% Estimated 2020 Existing Traffic Volumes The estimated 2020 existing turning movement volumes at the study area intersections are summarized in Figure 4 on the following page. Pedestrians & Bicyclists Within the study area, there are no specific facilities for pedestrians or bicyclists along Fowler Lane. There are existing sidewalks within Meadow Creek Subdivision for use by pedestrians. There are no specific facilities for bicyclists within the study area portions of Meadow Creek Subdivision at this time. Transit Service Streamline transit service is currently free for all passengers, which creates an incentive for transit ridership. Streamline does not currently offer any routes that provide service within close vicinity or adjacent to the proposed Buffalo Run site development. Projected Traffic Subdivision Traffic Development Trip Generation Trip generation rates found in Trip Generation, 10th Edition were also used for estimating Buffalo Run site development traffic. Average vehicle trip ends were estimated based on dwelling units using Land Use Code 220 – Multifamily Housing : Low-Rise. The total estimated trip generation for the proposed development is provided in Table 2 on page 11. Analyses are summarized in Appendix B. 295 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 10 296 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 11 Figure 4: Estimated Current Daily Traffic Table 2: Estimated Buffalo Run Site Development Trip Generation Summary Land Use Units Average Weekday Trips Average Weekday, AM Peak Hour Trips Average Weekday, PM Peak Hour Trips Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Enter Exit Total Multifamily Housing: Low-Rise (Residential Condominium) 288 1,069 1,069 2,138 30 100 130 95 56 151 Units = Dwelling Units Development Trip Distribution Trip distribution is the process of identifying the probable destinations, directions, and traffic routes that development related traffic will likely affect. Various methods are available for estimating trip distribution, including the analogy, trip distribution model, area of influence, origin-destination (O-D), and surrogate data methods. This study utilizes the O-D method. Considering the existing transportation network, it is anticipated that drivers will primarily utilize Kurk Drive and South 27th Avenue to access South 19th Avenue. This is reflected in the trip distribution for the proposed development shown in Figure 5 below. 297 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 12 Figure 5: Primary Trip Distribution Trip Assignment The assignment of development related traffic provides the information necessary to determine the level of site related impacts to the area roadway system and intersections. It involves determining the volume of traffic and its movements within the transportation system. At a minimum, trip assignment must also consider route choice, how the existing transportation system functions, and travel times to and from the site. The resulting traffic assignment at the study area intersections for the Buffalo Run site development is shown in Figure 6 on the following page. Pedestrians & Bicyclists Boulevard style sidewalks are proposed to be included on both sides of interior roadways as well as sidewalks adjacent to the curb where angle or perpendicular parking is included within Buffalo Run. These improvements would link to the sidewalk network on the adjacent street system in Meadow Creek Subdivision. Other than provisions for bicycle parking as required by the City of Bozeman, no other specific facilities for bicyclists are currently proposed. Transit Service No specific improvements are proposed with the Buffalo Run development for transit service. Non-Site Traffic Method of Projection In order to more accurately reflect the potential impacts from development generated traffic it is necessary to develop an estimate of non-site related traffic growth during the analysis period. Three primary means are typically used to estimate growth of non-site generated traffic, including the build-up method, the use of transportation plans or models, as well as the trends or growth rate method. The build-up method takes into account traffic growth due to approved or anticipated to be approved developments in the study area. Transportation plans or models typically provide estimates for traffic volumes for approximately 20 years into the future. The trends or growth rate method involves evaluating the historic traffic growth rates within a study area. The underlying assumption with this method is that historic growth trends will remain approximately the same and continue in the future. Estimated background traffic volumes for the year 2025 were established by using the trends or growth rate method. No significant traffic growth is estimated within Meadow Creek Subdivision. Traffic growth estimates on 298 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 13 Fowler Lane and Blackwood Road utilized AGR values of fourteen percent (14%) and five percent (5%), respectively. The estimated 2025 background traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7 on page 15. 299 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 14 Figure 6: Buffalo Run Site Development Traffic Assignment 300 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 15 Figure 7: Estimated 2025 Background Traffic 301 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 16 Total Traffic Vehicular traffic generated from the proposed Buffalo Run site development was combined with estimated 2025 background traffic volumes to arrive at the estimated 2025 total traffic volumes evaluated as a part of this study, which are shown in Figure 8 on the following page. Transportation Analyses Methodologies This section documents the methodologies and assumptions used to conduct the traffic impact analyses for the Buffalo Run site development. Study methodology and analyses are based on ITE’s Recommended Practices for Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development. These analyses are used to determine the project’s conformance with City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, and Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) policies and evaluate whether the proposed development’s impacts are perceptible to the average driver. Study Scenarios This study presents analyses of the following scenarios:  Estimated Existing Conditions  Estimated 2025 Background Traffic  Estimated 2025 Total Traffic Analysis Methodologies Transportation system operating conditions are typically described in terms of “level of service”. Level of service (LOS) is the performance measure used to evaluate the cumulative effects of such things as travel speed, traffic volumes, roadway and intersection capacity, travel delay, and traffic interruptions. Operating conditions are designated as LOS A through LOS F, which represents the most favorable to the least favorable operating conditions. Level of service for intersections is determined by control delay. Control delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a queue to the time the vehicle departs from the stop line. The total elapsed time includes the time required for the vehicle to travel from the last-in-queue position to the first-in-queue position, including deceleration of vehicles from the free flow speed to the speed of vehicles in the queue. Appendix A lists the delay/LOS criteria listed in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition | A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (HCM) published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) for unsignalized intersections. 302 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 17 Figure 8: Estimated 2025 Total Traffic 303 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 18 Two-Way Stop-Controlled (TWSC) Intersections Two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersection capacity and level of service analyses were performed using HCS TWSC Version 7.4 developed and maintained by the McTrans Center at the University of Florida. TWSC intersection analyses are based on Chapter 20 of the HCM. The HCM methodology for evaluating TWSC intersections is based on gap acceptance and conflicting traffic for vehicles stopped on the minor street approaches. The critical gap (or minimum acceptable gap) is defined as the minimum time interval in the major street traffic stream that allows entry for one minor street vehicle. Average control delay and LOS for the “worst approach” are reported. LOS is not defined for the whole intersection. All-Way Stop-Controlled (AWSC) Intersections All-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersection capacity and level of service analyses were performed using HCS AWSC Version 7.4 also developed and maintained by the McTrans Center. AWSC intersection analyses are based on Chapter 21 of the HCM. The HCM methodology for evaluating AWSC intersections is based on traffic conditions on each of the approaches to the intersection as well as driver perception and consensus. Average control delay and LOS for each approach and the whole intersection are reported. Capacity & Level of Service Analyses Capacity and level of service analyses were performed for the study area intersections for each of the study scenarios. Detailed results of the analyses are provided in Appendix C and are summarized in the following figures:  Figure 9: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2020 Current Daily Traffic – Page 19  Figure 10: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2025 Background Traffic – Page 20  Figure 11: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2025 Total Traffic – Page 21 Findings Need for Any Improvements Capacity and level of service analyses for traffic conditions based on estimated 2020 existing, 2025 background, and 2025 total traffic conditions identified that each of the study area intersections is projected to function at LOS A for both the weekday, AM and PM peak periods. Therefore, no additional improvements are necessary to mitigate projected traffic operations with the development of the proposed Buffalo Run site development. 304 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 19 Figure 9: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2020 Current Daily Traffic 305 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 20 Figure 10: Traffic Operations Summary for Estimated 2025 Background Traffic 306 PROJECT LOCATION N Fowler Ln Blackwood Rd S 30th Ave Kurk Dr Meah Ln Blackwood Rd S 31st Ave 29th Ave S 28th Ave S 27th Ave S engineerssurveyorsplannersscientists 2880 Technology Boulevard West Bozeman, MT 59718 Phone: (406) 587-0721 Fax: (406) 922-6702 FIG. 11: ESTIMATED 2020 TOTAL TRAFFIC LOS SCALE: 1" = 500' WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR APPROACH LOS A A A LEGEND A WEEKDAY AM PEAK HOUR APPROACH LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A 307 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 22 Pedestrians & Bicyclists Within the study area, there are no specific facilities for pedestrians or bicyclists along Fowler Lane. There are existing sidewalks within Meadow Creek Subdivision for use by pedestrians. There are no specific facilities for bicyclists within the study area portions of Meadow Creek Subdivision at this time. Boulevard style sidewalks are proposed to be included on both sides of interior roadways as well as sidewalks adjacent to the curb where angle or perpendicular parking is included within Buffalo Run. These improvements would link to the sidewalk network on the adjacent street system in Meadow Creek Subdivision. Other than provisions for bicycle parking as required by the City of Bozeman, no other specific facilities for bicyclists are currently proposed. Transit Service Streamline transit service is currently free for all passengers, which creates an incentive for transit ridership. Streamline does not currently offer any routes that provide service within close vicinity or adjacent to the proposed Buffalo Run site development. No specific improvements are proposed with the Buffalo Run site development for transit service. Conclusions & Recommendations Analysis of trip generation estimates, site circulation, and traffic operations reveal that the proposed Buffalo Run site development is projected to have limited impact on the area transportation system as currently proposed through the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. If the below improvements are implemented as recommended, any impacts resulting from the proposed development should operate safely and efficiently. All traffic control improvements should be installed in accordance with City of Bozeman and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. Interior Roadways & Intersections  Driveways should be installed in accordance with the City of Bozeman’s design standards.  Driveways and internal drive aisles need to be designed for the appropriate vehicles that may access the facility, including emergency and solid waste vehicles.  Adequate sight distance must be preserved at driveways, internal intersections, and crosswalks for driver, pedestrian, and bicyclist safety in accordance with City of Bozeman and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards.  Stop control should be installed on the westbound site approaches at their intersection with Fowler Lane. 308 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 23 Pedestrian & Bicyclist Connectivity  Sidewalk and/or trail improvements should be constructed to City of Bozeman standards, at a minimum. Traffic Control Guidance  All traffic control improvements should be installed in accordance with Montana Department of Transportation, City of Bozeman, and the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. 309 Traffic Impact Study Buffalo Run Site Development | Bozeman, Montana 24 References 1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. (2011). A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Washington, DC: Author. 2. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (2005). Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development: An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice. Washington, DC: Author. 3. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (September 2017). Trip Generation, 10th Edition. Washington, DC: Author. 4. Institute of Transportation Engineers. (June 2004). Trip Generation Handbook: An ITE Recommended Practice. Washington, DC: Author. 5. Morrison-Maierle. (June 2014). Transportation Planning Study: South 27th Avenue and the Montana State University Innovation Campus. Bozeman, MT: Author. 6. Robert Peccia & Associates and Alta Planning + Design. (April 25, 2017). Bozeman Transportation Master Plan. Bozeman, MT: City of Bozeman. 7. Transportation Research Board. (2016). Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis. Washington, DC: Author. 8. United States Department of Transportation – Federal Highway Administration. (May 2012). Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, 2009 Edition with Revision Numbers 1 and 2. Washington DC: Author. 310 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 24, Jun 4, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 3, 2009—Sep 1, 2016 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 235 J-18 J-28 J-17 J-29 J-16 J-30 J-15 PMP-1 PMP-2 R-3 R-1 H-3 H-2 H-1 H-11 H-10 H-9 H-8 H-7 H-6 H-5 H-4 27 Siemon Company Drive Suite 200 W Watertown, CT 06795 USA Page 1 of 30 +1-203-755-1666 7/25/2020 WaterCAD CONNECT Edition Update 2 6475.002_WaterModel.wtg Bentley Systems, Inc. Haestad Methods Solution Center [10.02.00.43] 193 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 24, Jun 4, 2020 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Aug 3, 2009—Sep 1, 2016 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. Custom Soil Resource Report 10 126 SW 1 4 SECTION 23 T2S R5E KOUNTZ DAYLE H TRACT 1 SE 1 4 SE 1 4 SECTION 22 T2S R5E KOUNTZ DAYLE H. MARITAL TRUST N 1 2 SE 1 4 SECTION 22 T2S R5E KURK DRIVE (30' - ROW) SOUTH 30TH AVE. (60' - ROW) SOUTH 31TH AVE. (40' - ROW) FOWLER LANE (60' - ROW) D Y H E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S E8S MEAH LANE (60' - ROW) BLACKWOOD RD (45' - ROW) 150 N ½ SW ¼ SW ¼ of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, Gallatin County, Montana ANNEXATION AREA SUMMARY TOTAL ANNEXATION AREA: 20.79 acres (905,625.40) Sq. Ft. BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL R-3 ZONING BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL 2020 BUFFALO RUN - 5400 FOWLER LANE ZONE MAP AMENDMENT PROPOSED ZONING: R-5 ZONING: 20.79 acres (905,625.40) Sq. Ft. PROPOSED ZONING: R-5 COPYRIGHT © MORRISON-MAIERLE, INC.,2020 PLOTTED DATE: Apr/29/2020 PLOTTED BY: matt e. ekstrom DRAWING NAME: N:\6475\002 - Topo and Boundary Survey\ACAD\Exhibits\6475002 ZONE MAP.dwg 1/4 SEC. SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE PROJ. #: SHEET OF PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, MONTANA DATE: COUNTY, MONTANA SCALE: CLIENT: FIELD WORK: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: engineers surveyors planners scientists Morrison Maierle 315 N. 25th Street, Suite 102 Billings, MT 59101 Phone: 406.656.6000 Fax: 406.237.1201 1 1 GALLATIN 6475.002 1"=150 4/2020 MEE JW 5E 2S SW 23 LEGAL DESCRIPTION POINT OF BEGINNING BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL R-3 ZONING BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE: RESIDENTIAL EXISTING 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT PER COUNTY ROAD BY PETITION NO. 17 EXISTING 60 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT PER PLAT J-453 PROPOSED ZONING: R-5 A description of land being the N ½ SW ¼ SW ¼ of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, Gallatin County, Montana, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest 1/16th corner of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, also being the Northwest Corner of Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1, Plat J-453, the Point of Beginning; thence S0°01'33”W along the western boundary of Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1, Plat J-453, a distance of 665.57' to a found aluminum cap monument, being the Northeast corner of Deed 146 Film 3341; thence S89°52'06”W along the north line of Deed 146 Film 3341 through a 30 foot witness corner, aluminum cap monument a distance of 1330.04' to the West section line of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, being the Northwest Corner of Deed 146 Film 3341; thence S89°52'06”W a distance of 30.00' to the West Right-of-Way line of the Fowler Lane County Road Easement; thence N0°05'46”W along said County Road Easement Right-of-Way a distance of 665.51'; thence N89°51'57”E a distance of 30.00' to the S 1/16th corner of Section 23 Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Principal Meridian, being the Southwest corner of COS 2074, DOC # 375838; thence N89°51'57”E along the south line of COS 2074, DOC # 375838, through a 30 foot witness corner, aluminum cap monument a distance of 1331.45' to the Point of Beginning. The area of the above described parcel of land is 20.79 acres, more or less. GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS GALLATIN COUNTY/ BOZEMAN AREA: AS 48