Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-24-21 DRB Agenda & PacketA.Call meeting to order B.Disclosures C.Changes to the Agenda D.Approval of Minutes D.1 Minutes Approval for 02-12-20, 02-26-20, 03-11-20 and 02-24-21(Krueger) E.Public Comment THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA DRB AGENDA Wednesday, March 24, 2021 WebEx Meeting Information Via Webex: https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php? MTID=ede87a968273f53200f96c829dbcc87e9 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: 182 526 6777 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 Wednesday, March 24th, 2021. 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. 1 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 F.1 Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development Major Modification, Application 20051(Rosenberg) G.FYI/Discussions H.Adjournment For more information please contact Brian Krueger, bkrueger@bozeman.net This board generally meets the 4th Wednesday of the month from 5:30 to 7:30 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). 2 Memorandum REPORT TO:Design Review Board SUBJECT:Minutes Approval for 02-12-20, 02-26-20, 03-11-20 and 02-24-21 MEETING DATE:March 24, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes RECOMMENDATION:Suggested Motion: I move to approve the meeting minutes for February 12th, 2020 I move to approve the meeting minutes for February 26th, 2020 I move to approve the meeting minutes for March 11th, 2020 I move to approve the meeting minutes for February 24th, 2021 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:1. Approve meeting minutes with corrections. 2. Do not approve meeting minutes. FISCAL EFFECTS:None Attachments: 2-12-20 DRB Minutes (Draft).pdf 2-26-20 DRB Minutes (Draft).pdf 03-11-20 DRB Minutes (Draft).pdf 02-24-21 DRB Minutes DRAFT.pdf Report compiled on: March 15, 2021 3 Design Review Board Wednesday, February 12, 2020 at 5:30 pm City Hall, Commission Room | 121 N. Rouse Ave., 59715 A. 05:34:11 PM (00:00:09) Call meeting to order and Roll Call Present Were:  Lotus Grenier  Ethan Barlow  Brady Ernst (Vice Chairman)  Peter Constanti  Troy Scherer  Cyndy Andrus (Commission Liaison)  Brian Krueger (City Staff) B. 05:34:36 PM (00:00:34) Changes to the Agenda - None C. Minutes Approval  01.08.20 Minutes (PDF) o 01.08.20 Video Link 05:34:52 PM (00:00:50) MOTION: To approve the minutes of the January 8th meeting. Peter Constanti 05:34:58 PM (00:00:56) MOTION SECONDED: Ethan Barlow 05:35:00 PM (00:00:58) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion passes unanimously D. 05:35:28 PM (00:01:26) Public Comment Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. None E. 05:35:42 PM (00:01:40) Disclosures Lotus Grenier stated that she is a personal friend of the owner of the Armory Project, but does not feel that will conflict with her role on the board. Brady Ernst disclosed that he worked on Phase 1 of the Armory Project in 2013/2014 and will recuse himself for this part of the meeting. Ethan Barlow served as Acting Chairman for the remainder of the meeting. F. ACTION ITEMS: 4 1. 19410 Armory Project Modification (Krueger) Two phase site plan modification application for a hotel development on a 19,310 square foot site in the B- 3 zoning district at 24 West Mendenhall Street.  19410 Armory Project Modification Staff Report  19410 Armory Project Modification Application  19410 Armory Project Modification Phase 1 Plans  19410 Armory Project Modification Phase 2 Plans  19410 Armory Project Phase 2 Color and Material Palette  19410 Original Z13064 Report and Plans 05:36:29 PM (00:02:27) City Development Review Manager Brian Krueger presented an overview of the project, which is a modification of the entire building originally approved in 2014. Due to the modifications, the Design Review Board will be the advisory board to the Director of Community Development on this project. The decision will be with the Director and will not go to the City Commission. Mr. Krueger went over the portions of the project that the current application is requesting as modification of the originally approved project. The proposal is a two-phase project. In general, the proposed changes in Phase 1, excluding the mechanical equipment locations and screening, are recommended for approval by staff. They meet standards, parking has been analyzed and they have updated the traffic study. Phase 2 of the proposal covers adding mechanical equipment to the rooftop and lighting changes. This part of the proposed plan, as submitted in the proposal, is not recommended by staff for approval. 06:00:51 PM (00:26:49) Mr. Krueger went into further explanation of Phase 2 changes proposed. The lighting plan is not sufficient for approval. 06:13:25 PM (00:39:23) Applicant representative, Cory Lawrence, presented his overview of the project. Mr. Lawrence offered a binder to the board members that covered his presentation. He presented documentation of approved plans from the project from 2015 that was not included in the Staff presentation. He stated that it was not fair for the current modification request to be compared to the 2013 plans and the staff report not include any reference to a set of 2015 plans. Mr. Lawrence stated that there is little change from the current proposed modification from the 2015 approved plans. He also stated that the materials on the exterior of the building were previously approved by the city in the 2015 plans. 06:28:12 PM (00:54:10) Mr. Lawrence described the requested lighting for the project. 06:34:28 PM (01:00:26) Staff and the applicant’s representatives answered questions from the Board Members concerning the major changes from the 2015 design and the 2019 application, which building codes apply to this project and the routing of building plans between the Building department and the Planning Department. Board members asked the applicant if they felt that they had any responsibility to go to the Planning with the changes in the 2015 design. The applicant clarified changes in the exterior materials and the changes in lighting. 5 Public Comment: 07:25:41 PM (01:51:39) Andy Holloran, 5 W. Mendenhall, as a developer commented on the responsibilities of a property developer. As a neighbor to the building, he commented on the changes proposed for the project. 07:29:03 PM (01:55:01) Erin Whitten, new Bozeman resident, and works for the management company that will operate the hotel. Feels that this is a good project for the community. 07:34:40 PM (02:00:38) Tyler Delaney, Bozeman, expressed his support for the project. 07:36:39 PM (02:02:37) Board members had additional questions for staff about the public notification process and if there is an established process for approval of modifications to approved site plans. 07:39:45 PM (02:05:43) MOTION: For Phase 1: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff memorandum for application 19410. Troy Scherer 07:41:09 PM (02:07:07) MOTION SECONDED: Lotus Grenier 07:41:19 PM (02:07:17) Discussion: 07:45:51 PM (02:11:49) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion passes unanimously 07:46:56 PM (02:12:54) MOTION: For Phase 2: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff memorandum for application 19410 and move to recommend denial of Phase 2 of the application. Troy Scherer 07:47:19 PM (02:13:17) MOTION SECONDED: Peter Constanti 07:47:24 PM (02:13:22) Discussion: 07:59:20 PM (02:25:18) VOTE: 3 votes for the Motion, 1 vote against, Motion passes to recommend denial of Phase 2 of the application. 2. 19394 Home 2 Suites Hotel Site Plan (Rosenberg) A proposed 4-story, 103 room hotel on the south side of Baxter Lane. Project to be built in 2 phases. 6  19394 Home 2 Suites Hotel SP Plan Staff Report  19394 Home 2 Suites Hotel SP Plans  19394 Home 2 Suites Hotel SP Exterior Plans  19394 Home 2 Suites Hotel SP Landscape Plans 08:05:51 PM (02:31:49) City Staff Planner, Sarah Rosenberg described the proposed project in the B-2 zoning district on Baxter Lane. 08:11:46 PM (02:37:44) Don Cape, 3623 Stanford Drive, Developer of this property presented his project proposal. 08:13:29 PM (02:39:27) Lowell Springer and Gene Mickolio, Springer Architects, representing the applicant, answered questions from the board members concerning the project. Ms. Rosenberg responded to questions about commercial open space. Phase 2 has not been submitted, so that phase of the design cannot be considered under this review. 08:38:03 PM (03:04:01) Public Comment: None 08:38:18 PM (03:04:16) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 19394 and move to recommend approval of the site plan application subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions. Troy Sherer 08:38:44 PM (03:04:42) MOTION SECONDED: Peter Constanti 08:38:48 PM (03:04:46) Discussion: 08:45:06 PM (03:11:04) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion passes unanimously. G. 08:45:56 PM (03:11:54) FYI/Discussion H. 08:47:49 PM (03:13:47) Adjournment For more information please contact Brian Krueger at bkrueger@bozeman.net This board generally meets the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at 5:30pm 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 406-582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 7 Design Review Board Wednesday, February 26, 2020 at 5:30 pm City Hall, Commission Room | 121 N. Rouse Ave., 59715 A. 05:31:05 PM (00:00:15) Call meeting to order and Roll Call Present Were:  Lotus Grenier  Mark Hufstetler (Chairman)  Christopher Keil  Troy Sherer  Ethan Barlow  Cyndy Andrus (Commission Liaison)  Brian Krueger (City Staff) B. Changes to the Agenda C. 05:31:40 PM (00:00:50) Minutes  1.8.20 Minutes (PDF)  1.22.20 Minutes (PDF)  City of Bozeman Video Streaming Site 05:31:48 PM (00:00:58) MOTION: To approve the minutes for January 8th and January 22nd. Ethan Barlow 05:31:51 PM (00:01:01) MOTION SECONDED: Chris Keil 05:31:54 PM (00:01:04) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion passes unanimously. D. Disclosures E. 05:32:07 PM (00:01:17) Public Comment Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes. None F. ACTION ITEMS: 1. 05:32:38 PM (00:01:48) 19528 Bozeman Public Safety Center SP (Krueger) A Site Plan application for the construction of a safety center building to include offices, municipal courts, a police station, and a fire station including accessory uses, buildings and site improvements. The building proposes a footprint of 54,819 square feet and is three stories in height.  19528 Staff Report 8  19528 Application  19528 Architectural Plans  19528 Civil Plans  19528 Electric, Lighting, Landscape & Irrigation Plans 05:32:50 PM (00:02:00) Troy Sherer recused himself from this project as his firm is working on the project. 05:33:03 PM (00:02:13) City Development Review Manager Brian Krueger gave an overview of the proposed City of Bozeman Public Safety Center project. Mr. Krueger described the project’s buildings, parking, and access to the county fairgrounds and Rouse Ave. 05:47:24 PM (00:16:34) Jon Wirth, applicant representative from Think One Architects, described that the design was based with public and employee safety in mind. He also talked about building efficiency and sustainability. James Taylor, applicant representative from Anderson Mason Dale Architects of Denver, Colorado described his firm’s work on the project. Mr. Taylor talked about the layout of the building and the progression of the design. 06:18:11 PM (00:47:21) Applicant representative Stephan Hall presented a video of a virtual tour of the interior of the proposed building. 06:19:59 PM (00:49:09) Board members presented questions for the applicant representatives. Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn, City lead on the project, explained the challenges involved with site cleanup to repurpose the former Montana Highway Department shop site location. He talked about the hydrocarbon cleanup of the site. Board members also asked the applicant about possible future expansion to the building, energy efficiency, and electric charging stations for vehicles. 06:54:41 PM (01:23:51) Public comment – None 06:54:49 PM (01:23:59) Assistant City Manager Chuck Winn answered Mr. Barlow’s additional question about the City’s ability to finance the building of this project. 06:58:22 PM (01:27:32) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 19528 and move to recommend approval of the Bozeman Public Safety Center Site Plan application subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions. Ethan Barlow 06:58:56 PM (01:28:06) MOTION SECONDED: Christopher Keil 06:59:06 PM (01:28:16) Discussion: 07:07:39 PM (01:36:49) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion passes unanimously 2. 19527 Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus PUDC (Rosenberg) A concept planned unit development for a medical mixed-use campus on 58 acres. A portion of the property is zoned B-2 and another is within the county. 9  19527 Staff Report  19527 Application  19527 Narrative  19527 Plans  19527 DRC Comments 07:13:29 PM (01:42:39) Associate City Planner, Sarah Rosenberg presented an overview on the conceptual planned unit development for the Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus. Two relaxation requests are under the proposal. One is for height requirements under B-2 zoning and another is for signage. 07:22:48 PM (01:51:58) Mitch Goplen, VP of Facilities Services and Construction, Billings Clinic and Pat Davies, Sanderson Stewart, representatives of the applicants gave their overview of the Billings Clinic Bozeman Campus conceptual PUD. 07:29:39 PM (01:58:49) The Design Review Board members discussed the Informal review of the proposed planned unit development project. 07:30:07 PM (01:59:17) Ethan Barlow and Mark Hufstetler asked the applicant questions on the proposed campus. Topics discussed were signage, valet parking, parking, visibility of the building. The applicant representative talked about the future buildings, the design cohesion throughout the whole property and building heights. 07:50:59 PM (02:20:09) Lotus Grenier asked the applicant about the timeframe for the project. She also commented on building placement and parking. Ms. Grenier also commented on general integrated health building designs. 08:00:09 PM (02:29:19) Deputy Mayor Andrus asked about the employee housing that is planned. The applicant commented on their plans for Affordable Housing that will be part of the campus. Mr. Goplen also commented on the planned sustainability of the buildings. 08:03:54 PM (02:33:04) Chairman Hufstetler asked the applicant about the hierarchy of the architecture of the PUD. Mr. Barlow compared the planned buildings that look similar to the city’s current library and the ability of expand due to the roofline. 08:16:36 PM (02:45:46) Troy Scherer asked about the relaxations requested in the PUD. Mr. Scherer commented on the proposed height of the buildings and parking. Other board members made additional comments on the proposed PUD. Ms. Rosenberg talked about block length and pedestrian corridors proposed in the PUD. G. 08:38:52 PM (03:08:02) FYI/Discussion Ms. Rosenberg informed the board that there are scheduled two PUD reviews for the next meeting of the Design Review Board. H. 08:39:14 PM (03:08:24) Adjournment 10 For more information please contact Brian Krueger at bkrueger@bozeman.net This board generally meets the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at 5:30pm 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 406-582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 11 Design Review Board Wednesday, March 11th, 2020 at 5:30 pm City Hall, Commission Room | 121 N. Rouse Ave., 59715 AUDIO RECORDING WAS NOT FUNCTIONING DURING THE FIRST PART OF THE MEETING. NO MINUTES OR TIMESTAMPS ARE AVAILABLE FOR THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. A. Call meeting to order and Roll Call Present Were:  Ethan Barlow  Christopher Keil  Mark Hufstetler (Chairman)  Lotus Grenier  Peter Costanti  Tom Rogers (City Staff) B. Changes to the Agenda C. Minutes (none) D. Disclosures E. 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. 19464 Bridger View Redevelopment Preliminary Planned Unit Development (Rogers) A Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) application to allow a residential development with relaxations to subdivision and zoning regulations to numerous dimensional standards, street design, utility easements, and a request for concurrent construction. The application includes a concurrent subdivision of three phases on 8.025 acres.  19464 Staff Report  19464 Application & Design Guidelines  19464 Architectural Plans  19464 Civil & Landscape Plans  19464 Site Plan 12 05:42:16 PM (00:10:23) AUDIO RECORDING STARTED City Senior Planner Tom Rogers continued with his overview of the Bridger View Redevelopment Preliminary Planned Unit Development application. The applicant has requested deviations for the city’s subdivision standards and zoning standards. 05:55:25 PM (00:23:32) Tracy Menuez, Associate Director and Community Development Director, HRDC, gave an overview of the history of the project area and introduced the design team for the development. 05:58:41 PM (00:26:48) Ben Lloyd from Comma Q Architectures described the mission driven project by the non-profit developer, HRDC. Mr. Lloyd described the layout of the planned project. He further described the types of housing units planned for this area. 06:09:53 PM (00:38:00) Ms. Menuez presented a summary of the deviations that are being requested for this planned project. 06:11:00 PM (00:39:07) Board members asked questions concerning the project. Mr. Barlow asked the applicant if this project is replicable at other locations and he asked about the architecture of the planned structures. 06:18:11 PM (00:46:18) Mr. Keil asked the applicant about the landscaping. 06:22:00 PM (00:50:07) Ms. Grenier asked City staff if the city is working with HRDC to see if this project would be replicable in other projects. She had additional questions to the applicant on the maintenance of streets, open spaces and the possible exterior materials being considered. 06:31:43 PM (00:59:50) Mr. Costanti questioned the applicant about the planned parking for the various units. 06:34:41 PM (01:02:48) Chairman Hufstetler asked the applicant questions about the middle- income homes in the development. Ms. Menuez stated that the units would be under a community land trust restriction attached to the units to keep them within reach of middle-income families. She also indicated that a separate community housing trust would be created for stewardship of the community. Mr. Barlow asked the applicant for clarification of trash removal in the site and access to the individual units. 06:56:20 PM (01:24:27) Mr. Rogers further clarified the deviations concerning street sizes and the reasons for the current standards. 07:02:11 PM (01:30:18) Public Comment: None 07:02:24 PM (01:30:31) MOTION: Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 19464 and move to recommend approval of the Bridger View 13 Redevelopment Planned Unit Development application subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions. Ethan Barlow 07:03:09 PM (01:31:16) MOTION SECONDED: Peter Costanti 07:03:15 PM (01:31:22) Discussion: 07:23:23 PM (01:51:30) VOTE: All in Favor, Motion carries unanimously G. 07:23:42 PM (01:51:49) FYI/Discussion H. 07:23:49 PM (01:51:56) Adjournment For more information please contact Brian Krueger at bkrueger@bozeman.net This board generally meets the second and fourth Wednesday of the month at 5:30pm 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 406-582-3232 (TDD 582-2301). 14 Bozeman Design Review Board Meeting Minutes, 02-24-21 Page 1 of 4 THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA MINUTES Wednesday, February 24, 2021 WebEx Meeting Information A) 00:03:56 Call meeting to order Present: Mark Hufstetler, Allison Bryan, Troy Scherer, M Ethan Barlow, Erin Eisner, Paul East, Brady Ernst Absent: Brian Krueger, Cyndy Andrus Board members provided brief introductions of themselves as it has been 11 months since this board convened. B) 00:07:13 Disclosures Board member Troy Scherer recused himself from Action Item E.1 C) 00:07:42 Changes to the Agenda D) 00:08:06 Public Comment E) 00:11:54 Action Items E.1 01:51:05 Master Site Plan for a multi-phase mixed use development on 119.45 acres called Blackwood Groves. Application 20292. Cover Page 20292 DRB Staff Report.pdf Blackwood Groves MSP RC#1 Narrative - 20-292 - 01_20_2021.pdf Appendix A - Phasing Plan 01_18_2021.pdf Appendix B - Block Frontage Plan 01_18_2021.pdf Appendix E - Parks Master Plan & IIL Info 01_18_2021.pdf Appendix O.4 - Wetland Exhibits 01_18_2021.pdf C7.0 - Lot Layout 01_18_2021.pdf Appendix D - Street Cross Sections 01_18_2021.pdf 15 Bozeman Design Review Board Meeting Minutes, 02-24-21 Page 2 of 4 Full_landscape_plans.pdf 00:13:03 Staff Presentation City Planner Sarah Rosenberg provided an overview of the Blackwood Groves Master Site Plan Application, including the surrounding area, zoning, proposed use, and phasing. Planner Rosenberg reviewed parks, trails, and pedestrian connectivity within the project. Planner Rosenberg reviewed watercourse setbacks and explained that they are still reviewing these details. Planner Rosenberg reviewed staff recommendation. Staff generally supports the application, and further code provisions and conditions of approval based on a revised submittal are necessary. 00:33:49 Applicant Presentation Project applicants Grant Syth of Bridger Builders, and Rob Pertzborn of Intrinsik Architecture provided an overview of the project including: surrounding area, watercourses, neighborhood character, commercial services, phasing, and timelines. Board Questions for Applicants Board member Ethan Barlow asked about scale and the different districts within the proposed development. Mr. Syth responded that they considered the neighboring character for a smooth transition with active streetscapes. Board member Brady Ernst asked about the town center and their orientation. Mr. Syth and Mr. Pertzborn responded that there is pedestrian access, and walkability on both sides of the buildings. Board member Allison Bryan asked about the design of the homes, comparing some contemporary renderings to more traditional renderings shown. Mr. Syth responded that their goal is to offer a variety, following the design guidelines. Mr. Pertzborn said that they strive for "comprehensive composition." Board member Paul East asked about the area surrounding Blackwood Road and how they plan to entice people to enter the commercial area. Mr. Pertzborn answered that they'll utilize the medians, and mid-block crossings to welcome pedestrians. Board Chairman Mark Hufstetler asked about the projected population in the neighborhood, traffic circulation, and what they expect to see in the commercial node. Mr. Syth answered that the mainstream commercial uses are along 19th Ave, while neighborhood oriented commercial services such as a coffee shop, daycare, etc. are more centrally located for the residents. 16 Bozeman Design Review Board Meeting Minutes, 02-24-21 Page 3 of 4 Mayor Cyndy Andrus disclosed that she lives in Alder Creek, a neighboring subdivision to the proposed development. Following, she asked if they had considered building the higher density residential prior to single family housing so that the residents know what to expect. The applicants responded that cottage housing will be higher density and is included in the first phase. They also plan to build phase I and II concurrently. Mayor Andrus also asked how this development will contribute to the City's Climate Plan. Mr. Syth responded that their goal is to exceed city standards on trees planted, and that the commercial services should save some commute for residents. 01:47:28 Public Comment 01:51:46 Motion “Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20292 and move to recommend approval of the master site plan application subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions.” M Ethan Barlow: Motion Brady Ernst: 2nd 02:03:57 Vote on the Motion to approve “Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20292 and move to recommend approval of the master site plan application subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions.” The Motion carried 3 - 0 Approve: Mark Hufstetler M Ethan Barlow Brady Ernst Disapprove: None 01:51:53 Board Discussion Board members Ernst and Barlow commended the applicants on the thought that went into the proposal and voiced support for the project. Chairman Hufstetler voiced support for the project and specifically commended the use of cottage housing and angled lots. Board member Paul East generally supported the uses and design of the project, and echoed Chairman Hufstetler's comments regarding the enhancement of the intersection of Blackwood and 11th. Mayor Andrus shared that as the Commission Liaison she does not participate in discussion, or vote, but that she does take information back to the City Commission. G) 02:05:50 Adjournment 17 Bozeman Design Review Board Meeting Minutes, 02-24-21 Page 4 of 4 For more information please contact Brian Krueger bkrueger@bozeman.net. This board generally meets the 2nd and 4th Wednesday of the month from 5:30 pm to 7:30 pm 18 Memorandum REPORT TO:Design Review Board FROM:Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner Brian Kreuger, Development Review Manager Martin Matsen, Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development Major Modification, Application 20051 MEETING DATE:March 24, 2021 AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission RECOMMENDATION:“Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20051 and move to recommend approval of relaxation numbers 1, 2, and 3 of the modification to the Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development application, subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions.” 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 property owner and applicant applied to modify the Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development (PUD). Located on Huffine Lane at the southwest corner of College Street, the 72-acre mixed-use development has evolved over time to provide a variety of different uses within it that include retail, restaurants, and offices. In total, there are five different phases within the development. Three of the five phases have undergone the subdivision process and are continuing to be developed. Phase four and five require further subdivision in order to be developed. These preliminary plat applications are currently in review. Proposed future development in these phases include a town center, a residential component, and hospitality uses. Since its inception, there have been numerous modifications to the development including changes to lighting fixtures, parking, allowable uses, signage, materials, setbacks, open space, pad sites, and parkland. Per Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.430.040.A.3(d), amendments to the final PUD can be reviewed as minor changes or major changes. This application includes major changes that require the review to follow the same PUD review and public notice process required for the approval of preliminary plans. The major changes to this plan include the following additional relaxations to the overall development: 19 1. BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board (DRB) as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. 2. BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Request to allow ground floor residential in a B-2 zone district as a principal use. 3. BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to replace the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 42, and to allow a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. 4. BMC 38.570. – Lighting. Request to allow site and building lighting to have a maximum LED color temperature of 4000K, rather than 3000K as allowed by code. This application also includes some general cleanup of the Development Manual such as eliminating conflicts based on past approved modifications, simplifying and clarifying sections of the Development Manual to comply with the current Unified Development Code, and providing additional exhibits in the appendices. The subject property’s Future Land Use Designation was recently changed through the adoption of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 from Community Commercial Mixed Use to Regional Commercial and Services. The property is zoned B-2. The criteria for granting a PUD are found in BMC 38.430.090. A PUD is a discretionary approval and the review authority must find that the overall development is superior to that offered by the basic existing zoning standards as required in BMC 38.20.030.A.4. The intent of a PUD is to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in development proposals within the city. Applicants can request relaxations from code requirements in exchange for a higher quality of design. The obligation to show a superior outcome is the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant asserts that the overall outcome of this proposal is superior to what would be obtained from the application of the default B-2 district. The DRC finds that the as the development has advanced, there are components of the lighting that does not show superior outcome. The DRC has reviewed the application. Based on its evaluation of the application against the criteria, the DRC found the application sufficient for continued review containing detailed documentation necessary for review. The DRB is scheduled to review the application on March 24, 2021. The Design Review Board (DRB) is the design review advisory body to the City Commission on this application and must make a recommendation to the City Commission. The City Commission will review this application on April 12, 2021. UNRESOLVED ISSUES:There are four relaxation requests affiliated with this modification. The Development Review Committee (DRC) does not support the relaxation request to allow for site and building lighting to have a maximum LED color 20 temperature of 4000K. There have been violations in the past in result to building lighting in the development which is outlined in the staff analysis below. Relaxation number 4 is analyzed separately in section 6 of this staff report which recommends denial of the relaxation request. ALTERNATIVES:1. Recommend approval of the application with the recommended conditions and report findings; 2. Recommend approval of the application with modifications to the recommended conditions and modifications to the report findings; 3. Recommend denial the application based on the Design Review Board’s findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the review on the application with the concurrence of the applicant, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. FISCAL EFFECTS:NA Attachments: 20051_DRBReport_Review_Final.pdf DevelopmentManualRevision_02-04-2021.pdf Commission Memorandum final - 010920.pdf Gateway PUD Violation Info.pdf BozemanGateway_Photos.pdf Report compiled on: March 19, 2021 21 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 1 of 31 20051 Design Review Board Staff Report for the Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Date: Design Review Board, March 24, 2021, at 5:30 pm via WebEx. City Commission, April 13, 2021, at 6:00pm via WebEx. Project Description: A major modification to the Bozeman Gateway PUD, originally approved in 2006. The modifications include eliminating conflicts within the Bozeman Gateway PUD Development Manual (Development Manual) based on previous modifications that have been approved over time, simplifying and clarifying sections of the Development Manual to comply with the current Unified Development Code, and to request four additional relaxations. The property is zoned B-2. Project Location: Bozeman Gateway PUD Subdivision, S14, T02S, R05 E, Gallatin County, Bozeman, Montana Recommendation: Approval with conditions and code requirements. Motion: “Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20051 and move to recommend approval of relaxation numbers 1, 2, and 3 of the modification to the Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development application, subject to conditions and all applicable code provisions.” Report Date: March 18, 2021 Staff Contact: Sarah Rosenberg, AICP, Associate Planner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Unresolved Issues There are four relaxation requests affiliated with this modification. The Development Review Committee (DRC) does not support the relaxation request to allow for site and building lighting to have a maximum LED color temperature of 4000K. There have been violations in the past in result to building lighting in the development which is outlined in the staff analysis below. Relaxation number 4 is analyzed separately in section 6 of this staff report which recommends denial of the relaxation request. 22 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 2 of 31 Project Summary The property owner and applicant applied to modify the Bozeman Gateway Planned Unit Development (PUD). Located on Huffine Lane at the southwest corner of College Street, the 72-acre mixed-use development has evolved over time to provide a variety of different uses within it that include retail, restaurants, and offices. In total, there are five different phases within the development. Three of the five phases have undergone the subdivision process and are continuing to be developed. Phase four and five require further subdivision in order to be developed. These preliminary plat applications are currently in review. Proposed future development in these phases include a town center, a residential component, and hospitality uses. Since its inception, there have been numerous modifications to the development including changes to lighting fixtures, parking, allowable uses, signage, materials, setbacks, open space, pad sites, and parkland. Per Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.430.040.A.3(d), amendments to the final PUD can be reviewed as minor changes or major changes. This application includes major changes that require the review to follow the same PUD review and public notice process required for the approval of preliminary plans. The major changes to this plan include the following additional relaxations to the overall development: 1. BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board (DRB) as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. 2. BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Request to allow ground floor residential in a B-2 zone district as a principal use. 3. BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to replace the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 42, and to allow a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. 4. BMC 38.570. – Lighting. Request to allow site and building lighting to have a maximum LED color temperature of 4000K, rather than 3000K as allowed by code. This application also includes some general cleanup of the Development Manual such as eliminating conflicts based on past approved modifications, simplifying and clarifying sections of the Development Manual to comply with the current Unified Development Code, and providing additional exhibits in the appendices. 23 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 3 of 31 The subject property’s Future Land Use Designation was recently changed through the adoption of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 from Community Commercial Mixed Use to Regional Commercial and Services. The property is zoned B-2. The criteria for granting a PUD are found in BMC 38.430.090. A PUD is a discretionary approval and the review authority must find that the overall development is superior to that offered by the basic existing zoning standards as required in BMC 38.20.030.A.4. The intent of a PUD is to promote maximum flexibility and innovation in development proposals within the city. Applicants can request relaxations from code requirements in exchange for a higher quality of design. The obligation to show a superior outcome is the responsibility of the applicant. The applicant asserts that the overall outcome of this proposal is superior to what would be obtained from the application of the default B-2 district. The DRC finds that the as the development has advanced, there are components of the lighting that does not show superior outcome. The DRC has reviewed the application. Based on its evaluation of the application against the criteria, the DRC found the application sufficient for continued review containing detailed documentation necessary for review. The DRB is scheduled to review the application on March 24, 2021. The Design Review Board (DRB) is the design review advisory body to the City Commission on this application and must make a recommendation to the City Commission. The City Commission will review this application on April 12, 2021. Alternatives 1. Recommend approval of the application with the recommended conditions and report findings; 2. Recommend approval of the application with modifications to the recommended conditions and modifications to the report findings; 3. Recommend denial the application based on the Design Review Board’s findings of non- compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 4. Open and continue the review on the application with the concurrence of the applicant, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. 24 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 4 of 31 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 3 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATIONS ..................................................................... 10 SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL .................................... 10 SECTION 4 – REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS ................................................................ 12 SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................................... 13 IN SUPPORT OF RELAXATIONS 1-3 ................................................................................ 13 SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF RELAXATION NUMBER 4. ................................................................................................. 24 APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY................................ 30 APPENDIX B – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ........................... 31 ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 31 25 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 5 of 31 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Zoning classification 26 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 6 of 31 Current Land Use Map 27 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 7 of 31 Future Land Use Map 28 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 8 of 31 29 20051 DRB Staff Report for Bozeman Gateway PUD Major Modification Page 9 of 31 30 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 10 of 31 SECTION 2 - REQUESTED RELAXATIONS 1. BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the DRB as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. 2. BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Request to allow ground floor residential in a B-2 zone district as a principal use. 3. BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to replace the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42, and to allow a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. 4. BMC 38.570. – Lighting. Request to allow site and building lighting to have a maximum LED color temperature of 4000K, rather than 3000K as allowed by code. The relaxations may be granted with a PUD. Only Relaxation 3 affects a relaxation that was previously approved through the PUD process. The applicant does not otherwise seek to make any changes to previously approved relaxations. The criteria for granting PUD relaxations are included in BMC 38.430.030.A.4.c. Staff has reviewed the criteria and supports requested relaxations 1-3. Staff is not in support of relaxation 4 to allow site and building lighting to have a color temperature of 4000K. See below for the staff analysis and findings for justification of its decision to not to support relaxation 4 in Section 6. SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. 1. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 2. BMC 38.430.040.A.3. The final planned unit development plan must be submitted, reviewed, and approved prior to the approval of any subsequent site plan. 3. The requested relaxations to the following sections are granted as proposed in the application materials and must be reflected in the final planned unit development plan, design guidelines, and associated property owners’ association (POA) documents as approved: 31 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 11 of 31 a) BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. b) BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in a B-2 zone district as a principal use. c) BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. 4. All lighting that references the allowance for 4000K in the Development Manual must be adjusted to 3000K. 5. The following language addresses new issues and must be added to the Bozeman Gateway Development Manual Site Lighting section: a) All wall mounted light fixtures must be downlit only; no uplighting is allowed. b) Entrance lighting may not exceed a height of twelve feet or one story, whatever is less. c) Any lighting above the first floor not required by the Building Code is prohibited. Any building mounted lighting cannot illuminate more than 15% of the façade. Each façade is calculated separately. d) Lighting of expansive wall planes, towers, roofs, or the use of architectural lighting that results in reflective glare or lighting concentrations in excess of 5 footcandles, or lighting that illuminates the majority of the wall plane is prohibited. No lighting can be used to visually break up large building masses at night. 6. The following language must be adjusted in the Bozeman Gateway Development Manual, pg 56: a) Wall mounted lighting must be downlit. Entrances can be highlighted but must not be mounted above a height of 12 feet or one story, whichever is less. b) Light fixtures must be appropriately shielded to prevent glare and must meet IESNA “full-cutoff” criteria (no light output emitted above 90 degrees at any lateral angle around the fixture). c) Light spread from fixtures illuminating elements of the facade must not significantly spill over onto neighboring facades. d) All ballasts and conduit must be concealed 32 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 12 of 31 e) Recessed can fixtures in soffits may be used. f) Permanent strings of light bulbs with less than 4 watts per bulb are permitted for use in lighting outdoor spaces. g) Lighting must comply with all local lighting codes. h) The following exterior lighting shall be used: i. Color temperature (LED and metal halide) cannot exceed 3000K or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. ii. Lumens cannot exceed 800 lumens, or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. iii. Volts cannot exceed 120V or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. iv. Watts cannot exceed 60W or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. 7. Prior to occupancy, all buildings require a photometric light study to be submitted to the City of Bozeman and certification from the lighting designer that the lighting is installed in conformance with the approved plans. 8. No property may be removed from the PUD or POA covenants without written approval of the City of Bozeman. 9. The City of Bozeman has relied upon the overall design and design standards required as part of the PUD application. The design and design standards may not be altered without consent of the City. SECTION 4 – REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS 1. BMC 38.220.300 and 310. The POA documents must include the requirements of Section 38.220.300 and 320. The proposed documents must be finalized and recorded with the PUD final plan. 2. BMC 38.430.040.A.3 outlines the review and approval process for the planned unit development final plan. The final plan must be in compliance with the approved preliminary plan and development guidelines. Upon approval or conditional approval of a preliminary plan and the completion of any conditions imposed in connection with that approval, an application for final plan approval may be submitted. For approval to be granted, the final plan must comply with the approved preliminary plan. The final plan must not contain any changes which would allow increased deviation/relaxation of the requirements of this chapter; and the final plat, if applicable, does not create any additional lots which were not reviewed as part of the preliminary plan submittal. The final plan may be approved if it conforms to the approved preliminary plan in the manner described above. Prior to final plan approval, the review authority may request a recommendation from the DRB, DRC, ADR staff, or other entity regarding any part of a proposed final plan. 33 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 13 of 31 SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF RELAXATIONS 1-3 Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. Major modifications to a PUD must follow the same PUD review as required for approval of the preliminary plan. In order to meet the criterion needed for a PUD, it must be demonstrated that it has a character superior to that produced by the existing standards. The analysis in this section is the summary of the completed review and support of relaxations 1-3. A. Applicable Plan Review Criteria, Section 38.230.100, BMC The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, do not in any way create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: 1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy The future land use designation is Regional Commercial and Services. “Regionally significant developments in this land use category may be developed with physically large and economically prominent facilities requiring substantial infrastructure and location near significant transportation facilities. Due to the scale of these developments, location, and transition between lower density uses is important. Residential space should be located above the first floor to maintain land availability for necessary services. Development within this category needs well-integrated utilities, transportation, and open space networks that encourage pedestrian activity and provide ready-access within and adjacent to development. Large community scale areas in this land use category are generally 75 acres or larger and are activity centers for several surrounding square miles. These are intended to service the overall community as well as adjacent neighborhoods and are typically distributed by a one-to two-mile separation.” The Bozeman Gateway PUD was changed to this designation with the update to the future land use map in the 2020 Community Plan and conforms to this designation. The goals of the Community Plan are separated by each relaxation that is part of the major modification outlined below. 34 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 14 of 31 Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. This criteria is not applicable to this relaxation request because the adopted growth plan doesn’t address whether projects should go to the DRB. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Goal DCD-2.7: Encourage the location of higher density housing and public transit routes in proximity to one another. The relaxation is supported by this goal. When the Bozeman Gateway PUD was adopted, the City Commission imposed a condition that required the development had to have a residential component of at least 70 units. Phase 4 of the development is expected to have two apartment buildings and residential use along the “Main Street” of the Town Center. Allowing for higher density housing nearby a slew of amenities that have already been developed and will continue to develop will assist in supporting concentrated development that uses land more efficiently, promotes walkability, and improves accessibility as this area is serviced by public transit. Although the regional and commercial land use designation states that residential spaces should be located above the ground floor, the majority of the development is commercial use, therefore it is still consistent with the purpose of the statement. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. Goal DCD-2: Encourage growth throughout the City, while enhancing the pattern of community development oriented on centers of employment and activity. Support an increase in development intensity within developed areas. When a property is designated as Regional Commercial and Services under the future land use map, the maximum height may be increased by up to a maximum of 50%, which in this case is 66 feet. Currently, the Bozeman Gateway PUD has a relaxation in place through its initial PUD approval that allows for a maximum building height of 65 feet. At that time, provisions of the BMC limited the maximum building height in the development to 44 feet. Now that the development is within 35 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 15 of 31 the Regional Commercial and Services zone, the code allows a maximum building height of 66 feet and there is no need for the previous relaxation allowance. Any development with the commercial zone districts can request an additional 30% increase to building height through a conditional use permit, which allows for a maximum building height of 85.8 feet. A conditional use permit is required to be reviewed by the City Commission. This relaxation, if granted, allows any building within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be built to 85.8 feet or, if the maximum height of its zoning district changes again in the future, the maximum height as allowed by the zone district. The development is bordered by land owned by Montana State University (MSU) to the west and south. MSU’s Long Range Plan shows the university expects to expand development to that area. The annexed MSU property is presently zoned as PLI which does not have a maximum height limit. For an area that is defined to have regional services and that is surrounded by university property, allowing for higher intensity development through greater maximum building height supports the Community Plan. 2. Conformance to chapter 2, including the cessation of any current violations Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. This criteria is not applicable to this relaxation request because there are no violations related to DRB review. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. This criteria is not applicable to this relaxation request because there are no violations around the use of residential. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. This criteria is not applicable to this relaxation request because there are no violations around building height in the development. 36 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 16 of 31 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations. Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. The request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the DRB is supported by the DRC. The standards of the UDC have evolved to provide more clarity on the design of a project. Any development within the Bozeman Gateway that meets the threshold for review by the DRB per 38.230.040 will require DRB review. The criteria is met because the development of the design manual as well as the adopted standards of Article 5 meet the purposes of DRB review. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Conformance will be verified with each individual site review. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. Conformance will be verified with each individual site plan review. 4. Conformance with special review criteria for applicable permit type as specified in article 2. A PUD is reviewed using a conditional use permit per section 38.310.040. The analysis for this permit type connects to 38.230.110.E which are the special review criteria for a conditional use permit. Staff is in support of relaxations 1-3 because they conform to all of the criteria that is outlined within the analysis of the staff report. 5. Conformance with the zoning provisions of article 3, including permitted uses, form and intensity standards and requirements, applicable supplemental use criteria, and wireless facilities and/or affordable housing provisions if applicable. Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review 37 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 17 of 31 Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. This criteria is not applicable to this relaxation because DRB review is not examined in article 3. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Residential uses on the ground floor in the B-2 zone district can be granted by the City Commission through a conditional use permit. If the relaxation to allow for ground floor residential is approved the development will conform to the B-2 zoning provisions. As a PUD is reviewed as a conditional use permit the intent of the standard has been met. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. If the relaxations to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or the maximum height allowed in the underlying zone district is granted, the development will conform to the B-2 zoning provisions. 6. Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4, including transportation facilities and access, community design and element provisions, and park and recreational requirements. Not applicable. None of the relaxations need to apply to the standards within this article because there is no request to relax from a standard within this article. Further analysis on how the PUD review criteria is outlined below. 7. Conformance with the project design provisions of article 5, including compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development; design and arrangement of the elements of the plan; landscaping; open space; lighting, signage; Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. 38 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 18 of 31 Not applicable because DRB review threshold is not examined in article 5. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Not applicable because use is examined in article 3. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. Not applicable because building height is examined in article 3. 8. Conformance with environmental and open space objectives set forth in articles 4—6, including the enhancement of the natural environment, watercourse and wetland protections and associated wildlife habitats; and if the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area. Not applicable. None of the relaxations need to apply to the standards. 9. Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of article 4 and article 6. Not applicable. None of the relaxations apply to the standards. 10. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties. The formal public comment period takes place from March 19 to April 13. No public comment has been received. 11. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or other means of addressing requirement of this title, whether the lots are either: a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become nonconforming; or b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or more elements of the development to become nonconforming. 39 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 19 of 31 Not applicable. Future subdivision will adhere to this. 12. Phasing of development Not applicable. There is no new proposed phasing for this development. B. Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria, Section 38.230.110, BMC In addition to the review criteria of section 28.230.100, the following criteria will be used in evaluating the application: 1. The site for the proposed use is adequate in size and topography to accommodate such use, and all yards, walls and fences, parking, loading and landscaping are adequate to properly relate such use with the land and uses in the vicinity; 2. That the proposed use will have no material adverse effect upon the abutting property. Persons objecting to the recommendations of review bodies carry the burden of proof; 3. That any additional conditions stated in the approval are deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to: a. Regulation of use; b. Special yards, spaces and buffers; c. Special fences, solid fences and walls; d. Surfacing of parking areas; e. Requiring street, service road or alley dedications and improvements or appropriate bonds; f. Regulation of points of vehicular ingress and egress; g. Regulation of signs; h. Requiring maintenance of the grounds; i. Regulation of noise, vibrations and odors; j. Regulation of hours for certain activities; k. Time period within which the proposed use shall be developed; l. Duration of use; m. Requiring the dedication of access rights; and n. Other such conditions as will make possible the development of the city in an orderly and efficient manner. In addition to all other conditions, the following general requirements apply to ever conditional use permit granted: 40 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 20 of 31 1. The right to a use and occupancy permit is contingent upon the fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use permit procedure; and, 2. That all of the conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land use, shall apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns, shall be binding upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, shall be consented to in writing, and shall be recorded as such with the county clerk and recorder's office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building permits, final plan approval or commencement of the conditional use. Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. The CUP criteria is not applicable to this relaxation request because it does not address whether projects should go to the DRB. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Residential uses are supported by the uses allowed under a conditional use permit. Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. The requested 85.8 foot building height is allowed under a conditional use permit. Properties designated regional commercial and services that are zoned B-2 can receive a maximum height increase up to 50% automatically and an additional 30% height increase with a conditional use permit. Staff has concluded that the criteria is met as it within the allowable maximums of the district. C. Planned Unit Development Review Criteria, Section 38.430, BMC From the design objectives and PUD review criteria, 38.430.040.E: The city will determine compatibility of a project based on the evidence presented during evaluation of the community design objectives and criteria of this chapter. In addition to the criteria for all site plan and conditional use reviews, the following criteria will be used in evaluating all planned unit development applications. 41 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 21 of 31 1. All development. All land uses within a proposed planned unit development must comply with the applicable objectives and criteria of the mandatory “all development” group. a. Does the development comply with all city design standards, requirements and specifications for the following services: water supply, trails/walks/bike ways, sanitary supply, irrigation companies, fire protection, electricity, flood hazard areas, natural gas, telephone, storm drainage, cable television, and streets? b. Does the project preserve or replace existing natural vegetation? c. Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive planned unit development? d. Does the design and arrangement of elements of the site plan (e.g., building construction, orientation, and placement; transportation networks; selection and placement of landscape materials; and/or use of renewable energy sources; etc.) contribute to the overall reduction of energy use by the project? e. Are the elements of the site plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) designed and arranged to maximize the privacy of residents of the project? f. Parkland. Does the design and arrangement of buildings and open space areas contribute to the overall aesthetic quality of the site configuration, and has the area of parkland or open space been provided for each proposed dwelling as required by section 38.420.020? g. Performance. All PUDs must earn at least 20 performance points. h. Is the development being properly integrated into development and circulation patterns of adjacent and nearby neighborhoods so that this development will not become an isolated “pad” to adjoining development? 2. Commercial. Planned unit developments in commercial areas (B-1, B-2, B- 2M, B-3 and UMU zoning districts) may include either commercial or multi- household development; however, adequate but controlled access to arterial streets is required. Activities may include a broad range of retail and service establishments design to serve consumer demands of the city area. a. If the project contains any use intended to provide adult amusement or entertainment, does it meet the requirements for adult businesses? b. Is the project contiguous to an arterial street, and has adequate but controlled access been provided? 42 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 22 of 31 c. Is the project on at least two acres of land? d. If the project contains two or more significant uses (for instance, retail, office, residential, hotel/motel and recreation), do the uses relate to each other in terms of location within the PUD, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, architectural design, utilization of common open space and facilities, etc.? e. Is it compatible with and does it reflect the unique character of the surrounding area? f. Is there direct vehicular and pedestrian access between on-site parking areas and adjacent existing or future off-site parking areas which contain more than ten spaces? g. Does the project encourage infill, or does the project otherwise demonstrate compliance with the land use guidelines of the city growth policy? h. Does the project provide for outdoor recreational areas (such as additional landscaped areas, open spaces, trails or picnic areas) for the use and enjoyment of those living in, working in or visiting the development? Per 38.430.030, all planned unit developments must be reviewed against the development standards established in this chapter. However, in order to encourage creativity and design excellence that would contribute to the character of the community, deviations from the requirements or the standards of this chapter may be granted. The review authority must make a determination that the deviation will produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to certain code standards in exchange for an enhanced development. Relaxation 1: BMC 38.210.010.C. DRB Review. Request to remove the requirement for any project within the Bozeman Gateway PUD to be reviewed by the Design Review Board as outlined in the original adoption of the Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z-05217), condition of approval number 40. Not applicable. This relaxation is a procedural requirement that was established with the original adoption of the PUD and has no impact on review criteria. Relaxation 2: BMC 38.310.040.C. Residential in the B-2 zone district. Allow ground floor residential in the B-2 zone district as a principal use. Yes. The development meets the applicable objectives of 1h, 2d, 2e, 2g and 2g. At this time, the development solely contains commercial uses and providing high density residential will create a properly integrated mixed use development that encourages infill and provides an adequate amount of outdoor recreational areas. 43 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 23 of 31 Relaxation 3: BMC 38.320.050. Building Height in the B-2 zone district. Request to remove the 65 foot height allowance from the original Bozeman Gateway PUD (Z- 05217), condition of approval number 42 and to allow for a building height of 85.8 feet or maximum height as allowed by the underlying zone district, as the allowable height through the development, whichever is greater. Yes. This development meets the applicable objectives of 1c, 1h, 2e, and 2g and allowing for a taller building meets the growth policy intentions for the surrounding regional area and is integrated into the existing development. D. Conclusion Based on the analysis above, staff finds that relaxations 1-3 align with the Community Plan, Conditional Use Criteria, and Planned Unit Development Criteria and recommend approval of them. However, since the intent of the PUD is to be of superior character and allow for innovative opportunities, per 38.430.030.A.5, the City has the ability to establish additional design standards, guidelines and policies for the purpose of implementing and interpreting the provisions of the PUD. Due to the previous issues pertaining lighting (see further analysis below in section 6), staff is recommending the following items be updated within the Bozeman Gateway Development Manual to resolve known issues and prevent future issues as outlined in condition of approval number 5 and 6: Building Lighting • All wall mounted light fixtures must be downlit only; no uplighting is allowed. • Entrance lighting may not exceed a height of twelve feet or one story, whatever is less. • Any lighting above the first floor not required by the Building Code is prohibited. Any building mounted lighting cannot illuminate more than 15% of the façade. Each façade is calculated separately. • Lighting of expansive wall planes, towers, roofs, or the use of architectural lighting that results in reflective glare or lighting concentrations in excess of 5 footcandles, or lighting that illuminates the majority of the wall plane is prohibited. No lighting can be used to visually break up large building masses at night. Within the Bozeman Gateway Development Manual, there are standards that conflict with what is recommended above as well as the UDC Lighting Section. The following are changes that should be reflected on page 56 of the Manual. The red text reflects what should be added and the crossed off text reflects what should be eliminated. 44 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 24 of 31 • Wall mounted lighting must be downlit. Entrances can be highlighted but light fixtures must not be mounted over a height of 12 feet or one story, whichever is less. such as wall sconces, focused on facade elements are encouraged. Entrances and projecting elements should be highlighted to create a visually lively street at night. • Light fixtures must will be appropriately shielded to prevent glare and must meet IESNA “full-cutoff” criteria (no light output emitted above 90 degrees at any lateral angle around the fixture). A high-quality light design must be incorporated into the overall facade design. • Light spread from fixtures illuminating elements of the facade must my not significantly spill over onto neighboring facades. • Lighting such as sconce lights or goose necks shall be used to visually break up large building masses at night. • All ballasts and conduit must be concealed • Recessed can fixtures in soffits may be used. • Permanent strings of light bulbs with less than 4 watts per bulb are permitted for use in lighting outdoor spaces. • Lighting shall must comply with all local lighting codes. • The following exterior lighting shall be used : o LED color temperature of 4000K (highly encouraged) o Metal Halide color temperature of 4000K o Color temperature (LED and metal halide) cannot exceed 3000K or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. o Lumens cannot exceed 800 lumens, or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. o Volts cannot exceed 120V or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. o Watts cannot exceed 60W or what is allowed by the BMC, whichever is more restrictive. • Exposed neon tube or LED string lighting must comply with the City of Bozeman UDC. SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF RELAXATION NUMBER 4. Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. 45 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 25 of 31 Major modifications to a PUD must follow the same PUD review as required for approval of the preliminary plan. In order to meet the criterion needed for a PUD, it must be demonstrated that it has a character superior to that produced by the existing standards. The analysis in this section is the summary of the completed review and basis for recommending denial of relaxation number 4: BMC 38.570. Building & Site Lighting. Request to allow site and building lighting to be 4000K, rather than 3000K as allowed by code. A. Applicable Plan Review Criteria, Section 38.230.100, BMC. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, do not in any way create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City Commission shall consider the following: 1. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy Staff is not in support of this relaxation request. Allowing for a lighting color temperature at 4000K does not meet the following goals of the Community Plan: Goal R-2.2 High Risk & Vulnerability: Ensure that strategies directly address the reduction of risk to human well-being, physical infrastructure, and natural systems. Higher color temperature from LED lighting emits a large amount of blue light that creates worse nighttime glare than conventional lighting. 4000K lighting produces a blue-rich lighting which can cause eye discomfort, glare, and create a road hazard.i Lower color temperature equates to a more comfortable, less glaring light. The 3000K color temperature aligns with the national Illuminating Engineering Standards set by the Illuminating Energy Society (IES). The IES & International Dark Sky Association (IDA) have produced multiple studies stating that all LED lighting should not exceed 3000K to reduce light pollution to protect the natural landscape, protect healthy and human safety, conserve nocturnal wildlife, and save energy. Street lighting and outdoor lighting retrofits using 4000K LED lamps could result in a factor of 2.5 increase in light pollution. ii Staff recommends denial of this relaxation because the higher color temperature lighting proposed poses a risk to human well-being by being a hazard to drivers in the area and because it interferes with natural systems according to studies conducted by the IES and IDA; therefore, the requested relaxation is inconsistent with the City’s adopted growth policy. 46 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 26 of 31 2. Conformance to chapter 2, including the cessation of any current violations There have been violations in the past on the Bozeman Gateway in regards to excess glare and lights being visible from a substantial distance. One of the violations includes the property located at 1040 & 1060 S. Fowler Avenue “Copper Harbor Building”. There were numerous complaints from the public on the amount of glare and light the exterior of the building illuminated. In April 2019, a Notice of Code Violation was issued in regards to the glare and amount of spillover being cast by the building. This violation is based on BMC 38.570.040.G: “All outdoor lighting must be designed and located such that the maximum illumination measured in footcandles at the property line may not exceed .3 on adjacent residential properties and 1.0 onto adjacent commercial properties and public rights-of-way.” “Floodlights, spotlights, or any other similar lighting may not be used to illuminate buildings or other site features unless approved as an integral architectural element on the development plan. On-site lighting may be used to accent architectural elements but not to illuminate entire portions of buildings. Where accent lighting is used, the maximum illumination on any vertical surface or angular roof surface may not exceed 5.0 average maintained footcandles.” Code compliance inspected the building and found that spill over onto adjacent properties exceeded 1.0 footcandles and the surface of the building exceeded 5.0 footcandles. The Bozeman Gateway development team made adjustments to the building lighting and provided information illustrating that the lighting meets current code. Although the light colored exterior and the sheer number of lights still produce a brighter façade, it was found that the lighting complied with average maintained footcandles and maximum illumination on adjacent properties. The violation was then lifted. However, there are still issues of noncompliance within the Bozeman Gateway Development. Per 38.570.040.G.3, except for residential lighting, street lighting, pathway intersection lighting and security lighting, all lighting must be turned off between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m unless the established is actually open for business during that time. Upon an inspection on March 17, 2021 after 11:00pm, it has been noted that lighting of many buildings are still illuminated during the time in which they must be turned off. See photos in attachments. Original photos with timestamps are located in the project folder. The denial of relaxation number 4 is supported because of these violations. Staff is requesting for the additional changes to the Development Manual as we are in support of relaxations 1-3 and due to all of the violations in the past, per 47 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 27 of 31 38.430.030.A.5, the City has the ability to establish additional design standards, guidelines and policies for the purpose of implementing and interpreting the provisions of the PUD as outlined in condition of approval number 5 and 6. 3. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations. Conformance with approved lighting plan will be verified with each individual site plan review. Condition of approval number 7 requires verification by appropriate professional. 4. Conformance with special review criteria for applicable permit type as specified in article 2. A PUD is reviewed using a conditional use permit per section 38.310.040. The analysis for this connects to 38.230.110.E which are the special review criteria for a conditional use permit. See A: Conditional Use Permit review criteria below for further analysis on specific criteria. 5. Conformance with the zoning provisions of article 3, including permitted uses, form and intensity standards and requirements, applicable supplemental use criteria, and wireless facilities and/or affordable housing provisions if applicable. Not applicable because lighting is not reviewed in article 3. 6. Conformance with the community design provisions of article 4, including transportation facilities and access, community design and element provisions, and park and recreational requirements. Not applicable. This relaxation does not apply to the standards within this article. 7. Conformance with the project design provisions of article 5, including compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development; design and arrangement of the elements of the plan; landscaping; open space; lighting, signage; The purpose of the lighting section as outlined in the UDC Section 38.570.010 is to: provide lighting in outdoor public places to protect public health, safety and welfare; provide lighting that protects drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians from the glare of non-vehicular light sources that impair safe travel; protect neighbors and the night sky from nuisance glare and stray light from poorly aimed, placed, applied, maintained or shielded light sources; protect and maintain the character of the City; prevent excessive lighting and conserve energy; and to provide adequate lighting for safe pedestrian and bike travel. 48 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 28 of 31 Although there is no lighting temperature rating that applies to site and building lighting, there is a street lighting standard that limits temperature to 3000K. The adoption of this standard was driven by the City’s Sustainability Division to reduce the energy output that non-LED lighting produces and to require all street lighting installed be LED. This standard was adopted in 2017 when the color temperature requirement for street lights was 4000K. Shortly thereafter, street lighting with 3000K became available and the recommended color temperature for street lighting from the Illuminating Engineering Standards (IES). The City changed its standard to reduce street LED lighting color temperature to 3000K as outlined in the City of Bozeman Engineering Design Standards and Specification Policy. See attached memorandum on the street lighting evaluation for further evaluation and detail. Site and building lighting is not required by the UDC (38.570.020) beyond what is outlined in the Engineering Standards and Building Code for safety measures. Building and site lighting must not produce any unacceptable levels of nuisance glare, skyward light, or excessive or insufficient illumination levels. To grant a relaxation to allow building and site lighting to have a color temperature that exceeds the street lighting standard does not meet this criteria because it is an unacceptable level that provides no additional safety measures to the development. This relaxation does not provide character superior to what is produced by the lighting section of the UDC which provides no public benefit or enhanced development. Therefore, staff finds that this relaxation does not meet this standard and recommends denial of it. 8. Conformance with environmental and open space objectives set forth in articles 4—6, including the enhancement of the natural environment, watercourse and wetland protections and associated wildlife habitats; and if the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area. Not applicable. This relaxation does not apply to the standards within this article because there are no requests to relax from these standards. 9. Conformance with the natural resource protection provisions of article 4 and article 6. Not applicable. None of the relaxations need to apply to the standards within this article. 10. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties. The formal public comment period takes place from March 19 to April 13. No public comment has been received. 49 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 29 of 31 11. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or other means of addressing requirement of this title, whether the lots are either: a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved configuration or use of the property or cause the development to become nonconforming; or b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to which the City is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or more elements of the development to become nonconforming. Not applicable. Future subdivision will adhere to this. 12. Phasing of development Not applicable. There is no new proposed phasing for this development. B. Conditional Use Permit Review Criteria, Section 38.230.110, BMC The same criteria under 5.C apply to this relaxation. Staff finds that request for increased lighting temperature does have adverse effect upon abutting properties and does not do anything to support public health, safety and general welfare. Condition of approval 5, 6, and 7 are deemed necessary in order for the development to meet the conditional use permit criteria. See findings above in Section 6. C. Planned Unit Development Review Criteria, Section 38.430, BMC. The same criteria under Section 5.C apply to this relaxation. This relaxation does not meet the criteria outlined in the PUD review criteria since it does not produce an environment, landscape quality and character superior to current code standards. As noted above, there have been lighting violations and other ongoing issues within the Bozeman Gateway development which does not align with the purpose of a PUD or the intent of the lighting section of the UDC. Staff finds that as the development has advanced, the implementation of the originally approved lighting standards from the Bozeman Gateway Development Manual does not result in a superior outcome and therefore, needs to be resolved. As authorized in 38.430.040.A.2 and 38.100.070.B, with this major modification application the overall PUD can be analyzed to determine if it meets the PUD criteria. When this PUD was adopted in 2006, its innovation and design did produce a superior development from the current standards. As the code has changed over time, the standards have progressed with current trends and goals of the City and community. 50 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 30 of 31 Because of the ongoing issues around light and the evolution of the PUD as a whole, research and analysis have been conducted in order to resolve the existing lighting problems. As the applicant is requesting for a relaxation to have less scrutiny in the review of the development and to allow for taller buildings, which relaxations are supported, staff finds that the relaxation for lighting is not consistent with a superior outcome as the other relaxations are. Granting a relaxation to allow for brighter lights on taller buildings will more likely produce excessive glare and increased light pollution. The Copper Harbor building is roughly 53’ tall and produces light that can be seen from developments a mile away. If a building that is 85.8 feet has the amount of lighting that the Copper Harbor building produces, it will generate even more excess lighting. Therefore, staff is requesting better lighting standards with conditions of approval 5 and 6 since we are in support of relaxations 1-3. D. Conclusion Based on the findings of Section 6, staff recommends denial of 4000K light for building and site lighting. APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The property is zoned B-2, Community business district. “The intent of the B-2 community business district is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more sides by limited access arterial streets. Multi-household dwellings, townhouses, and apartments are allowed as a secondary use due to their complementary nature and ability to enhance the walkability of these districts. Design standards emphasizing pedestrian oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes, and/or areas served by transit.” Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The property is designated as “Regional Commercial & Services.” Regionally significant developments in this land use category may be developed with physically large and economically prominent facilities requiring substantial infrastructure and location near significant transportation facilities. Due to the scale of these developments, location, and transition between lower density uses is important. Residential space should be located above the first floor to maintain land availability for necessary services. Development within this category needs well-integrated utilities, transportation, and open space networks that encourage pedestrian activity and provide ready- access within and adjacent to development. Large community scale areas in this land use category are generally 75 acres or larger and are activity centers for 51 19464 DRB Staff Report for the Bridger View Redevelopment PUD Page 31 of 31 several surrounding square miles. These are intended to service the overall community as well as adjacent neighborhoods and are typically distributed by a one-to two-mile separation.” APPENDIX B – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owner/Applicant: Mitchell Development Group, LLC, PO Box 738, Great Falls, MT 59403 Representative: Morrison-Maierle, Inc., 2880 Technology Blvd West, Bozeman, MT 59718 Report By: Sarah Rosenberg, Associate Planner ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. Bozeman Gateway PUD Development Manual Commission Memorandum for City Street Lighting Evaluation Gateway PUD Violation Info Photos of Bozeman Gateway at night i https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/ama-adopts-guidance-reduce-harm-high- intensity-street-lights, ii https://www.darksky.org/our-work/lighting/lighting-for-citizens/led-guide/ 52 REVISED: 06-06-08 REVISED: 08-10-10 REVISED: 03-07-12 REVISED: 01-29-14 REVISED: 03-09-18 REVISED: 11-3-20 REVISED: 1-25-21 53 Developer: Mitchell Development Group, LLC Ted Mitchell PO Box 738 Great Falls, MT 59403 (406) 761-4400 Architecture: Faure-Halvorsen Architects 1442 W. Main St., Suite A Bozeman, MT 59715 (406) 587-1204 Civil Engineer: Morrison-Maierle, Inc. James Ullman 901 Technology Blvd. Bozeman, MT 59718 (406) 587-0721 Landscape Architect: Red Barn Montana Chad Rempfer 3084 Thorpe Rd. Belgrade, MT 59714 (406) 924-8083 Current Contact Information (subject to change): 54 Table of Contents I. Introduction 1 A. Project Overview 3 B. Development Manual Purpose 4 C. Bozeman Gateway Defined 7 D. Project Phasing 8 E. Permitted Uses 9 II. Site Development Standards 11 A.Site Design 12 1. Professional Competence 12 2. Site Analysis 12 B.Traffic Flow and Parking 13 1. Vehicular Bridges 13 2. Bicycle Traffic 14 3. Walkways 14 4. Parking Lots 15 5. Snow Clearing 15 6. Service Facilities and Mechanical 16 Equipment Concealment C.Civic Spaces 18 1. Bozeman Gateway Core Streetscape 18 2. Concept Town Center Plaza 19 3. Paving Materials 20 4. Public Art and Fountains 21 5. Courtyards and Usable Open Space 21 55 D. Green Space 22 1. Open Space 22 2. Open Space Along Huffine Lane 23 3. Pedestrian and Bike Circulation 23 4. View Sheds 24 E. Site Lighting and Signage 25 1. Site Lighting 25 2. Site Signage 26 F. Utilities, Grading and Drainage 27 1. Utilities 27 2. Grading and Drainage 28 III. Landscape Design Standards 30 A.Overview 31 B.Vegetation 33 1. Tree and Shrub Species 33 2. Planting Beds 34 3. Lawns 35 C. Hardscape 36 1. Site Standards Furnishings 36 2. Outdoor Tables 37 3. Boulders 37 4. Asphalt Trails 38 5. Concrete Trails 38 6. Plaza Space 39 7. Planters 39 D. Storm Water Facilities 40 E. Maintenance 41 1. Irrigation 41 2. Vegetation 43 3. Hardscape 43 56 IV. Building Design Standards 44 A.Overview 45 B.Building Exterior 47 1. Building Planning 47 2. Building Heights 49 3. Mass and Scale 49 4. Architectural Vocabulary 51 5. Materials 52 6. Building Transparency 55 7. Building Entrances 55 8. Projecting Design Elements 55 C. Building Lighting 56 1. Exterior Façade Lighting 56 2. Exit Signs and Emergency Lights 57 D. Building Signage 58 1. General Signage Criteria 58 2. Signage Size and Quantity 59 3. Gateway Review Board (GRB)59 4. Permitted Signage Types 60 5. Signage Not Permitted 62 57 V. Review Procedures 63 A. Conceptual Sketch Review 64 1. Conceptual Sketch Submission 64 2. Conceptual Sketch Submission Document Approval 64 3. Conceptual Sketch Submission Document Requirements 64 B. Project Review 66 1. Project Submission 66 2. Project Submission Document Approval 66 3. Project Submission Document Requirements 66 4. City of Bozeman Site Plan Review 67 C. Construction Compliance 67 VI. Appendix 68 I. Terms & Definitions II. ExhibitsIII. PUD Standards IV. PUD RelaxationsV. PUD Setback TablesVI. PUD Parkland Tracking Table VII. PUD Performance PointsVIII. PUD Landscape Plans IX. PUD Modification ApprovalsX. PUD Typical Road Cross Sections 58 I.Introduction1 59 The renderings, plans and diagrams contained throughout this Development Manual are based on actual and preliminary schematic design of the project. While they exhibit the project’s overall design intent, they by no means present final site conditions, landscaping or building location and architecture. Photos throughout this document are used only to visually emphasis points within the text.2 60 I. Introduction A.Project Overview The Bozeman Gateway, situated at the southwest corner of College Street and Huffine Lane, encompasses a 72-acre mixed- use development. It isn’t a mall; It is Bozeman’s premier destination for dining, shopping, entertainment, creative office space, hospitality, and city central living. The center of the development, “The Bozeman Gateway Core”, (Refer to Appendix II.L for Exhibit) will be a concentration of unique retail, a variety of food fare, specialty professional services, and a minimum of 70 units of residential living. With direct access to public transit, the Bozeman Gateway becomes a reachable place for all. The individuality of the development is furthered through its varying architectural styles and pristine landscaping. All elements of design are held to the highest of standards, creating a quality civic space and memorability for the entire project. All Tenants within the development shall express themselves on the exterior façade or building. The building’s exteriors should be exciting and dramatic, full of life and personality, adding to the variety and visual interest of the streetscape. Each building should also include a dominant feature; 4-wall repetition of architecture will not be permitted. 3 61 I. Introduction B.Development Manual Purpose This Development Manual has been developed to implement the design philosophy of the Bozeman Gateway, namely, to blend structures and landscaping into a harmonious and aesthetically pleasing commercial community. The Development Manual provides a set of design guidelines to owners, lessees and builders in the planning, design, and construction of their building and parking areas. Any unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. This Development Manual is established and enforced by the Gateway Review Board (the “GRB”), which is made up of design professionals appointed by the Developer. The GRB will be the interpreter of the requirements of the Development Manual, and the GRB’s decision in matters relating to the same shall be final. The GRB, with the consent of the City of Bozeman, in which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, reserves the right to amend any or all provisions of this Development Manual, as appropriate at any time, in its sole and absolute discretion. The Development Manual shall apply to all property and/or buildings owned by the Developer or sold to third parties. They shall apply to development and improvements by all parties’, successors, and assigns. In addition, the Development Manual shall apply to all Ground Lessees, Parcel Purchasers, Major Tenants and buildings within the boundaries of the project as defined on the Master Plan. Any reference here to a “Ground Lessee” shall also apply to the “Ground Lessee’s” builder, subcontractor, or agents. As to any outparcel lot or building in the Project, no improvements may be commenced, erected, or maintained until the GRB has given its written approval of Final Submissions pursuant to the criteria listed in Section V –Review Procedures. This Development Manual is made a part of the P.U.D. in force on the Project and as such is enforceable by the GRB and designated public officials with the City of Bozeman, Montana. In addition to compliance with the requirements imposed by the Development Manual, the purchaser or ground lessee of any lot or building must comply with all zoning and other applicable governmental laws, rules, and regulations. Approval by the GRB pursuant to this Development Manual shall in no event be construed as representations or warranties that the Tenant’s conceptual sketch plans, final project plans, or improvements comply with any such governmental requirements. 4 62 I. Introduction B.Development Manual Purpose The Developer does not assume responsibility for any losses or damages arising out of the construction of the improvements permitted under its plan review process, nor shall the Developer’s approval of any plans, specifications or other submissions be deemed a representation or warranty by the Developer or its agents regarding the design, materials or any other aspect of the development depicted in such submission. Such review is limited to a review of the compatibility of the proposed improvements which includes such matters as internal traffic circulation, parking, access, landscaping, building site and dimensions, signage, grading, lighting, architectural and engineering design, drainage, and overall design. The Bozeman Gateway will be reviewed and monitored through three basic stages of its development. The following sections of the Development Manual go into further detail on each stage. • Conceptual Sketch Review • Project Review • Construction Compliance The Tenant, at its expense, shall submit to the GRB for review a complete electronic (PDF) set of documents at the conceptual sketch and project review stages of the review process. Document format is detailed in the following. The GRB must give their written approval of all aspects of the contents in this document. 5 63 I. Introduction B. Development Manual Purpose 6 The renderings, plans and diagrams contained throughout this Development Manual are based on actual and preliminary schematic design of the project. While they exhibit the project’s overall design intent they by no means present final site conditions, landscaping or building location and architecture. Photos throughout this document are used only to visually emphasis points within the text. 64 I. Introduction C. Bozeman Gateway Defined The Bozeman Gateway integrates mixed-uses throughout. The interior features pedestrian-friendly open-air squares and plazas. While vehicular access and angled parking are provided along the main interior street, the emphasis is on pedestrian activities. In addition, this particular presentation will be enhanced by prevalent landscaping spanning the development. (Refer to Appendix II.A for PUD Master Site Plan Exhibit) The idea of a single main entrance facade is abandoned in the Bozeman Gateway. The main portion of customer parking and vehicular circulation will be provided on the periphery of the development, integrating the extensive landscaping and pedestrian/bike paths to the core of the project. 7 To further enhance the concept, the Developer has incorporated an extensive trail system for not only pedestrians, but for bicyclists to enjoy as well. These trails are abundant with amenities such as resting/sitting areas, picnicking areas and bicycle parking. The project as a whole hopes to provide patrons the opportunity to enjoy the outdoor experience throughout all four seasons of the year. 65 I.Introduction D. Project Phasing The Bozeman Gateway is proposed to be constructed in five phases (revised 06-06-08). Generally, the development plan calls for construction of phases by demand (See Appendix II.B for PUD Phasing Plan Exhibit). The phase numbering does not necessarily present the order in which the phases will be developed. The actual order of construction will depend on the demand for the various types of uses offered. Phase boundaries may also be modified to account for fluctuation in the demand to the different types of uses of locations. 8 66 I.Introduction E. Permitted Uses The Bozeman 2020 Community Plan supports uses consistent with those allowed by B-2 zoning for the entire Bozeman Gateway project. This zone is described by the Unified Development Code as, “The intent of the B-2 community business district is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more sides by limited access streets.” Typical uses within this designation are a “broad range of functions including retail, education, professional and personal services, offices, residences, restaurant, and general service activities.” This usage provides a natural extension of the Huffine Lane commercial corridor allowing uses that are very consistent with the character of the surrounding area, enhancing and preserving the nature of the district. The Bozeman Gateway PUD is unique in the fact that residential is allowed on the first floor in a B-2 zone. The location of residential on the first floor is allowed throughout the entire PUD. The following uses will NOT be permitted: a.Any public or private nuisance. b.Any noise or sound that is objectionable due to intermittence, beat, frequency, shrillness or loudness. c.Any smell that is offensive or objectionable due to its nature or intensity.d.Any excessive quantity of dust, dirt, or fly ash. This prohibition shall not preclude the sale of soils, fertilizers, or other garden materials or building materials in containers if incident to the operation or a home improvement or other similar store. e.Any fire, explosion, or other damaging or dangerous hazard, including the storage, display, or sale of explosives or fireworks. f.Any heavy assembly (Modification #17574, Approved 12-29-17), heavy manufacturing (Modification #17574, Approved 12-29-17), distillation (revised 06-06-08), refining, smelting, agriculture or mining operations. 9 67 05-15-06 I.Introduction E. Permitted Uses g.Any mobile home or trailer court, junk yard, or stock yard, or animal raising excluding pet shops. h.Any drilling for and/or removal of subsurface substances. i.Any dumping of garbage or refuse, other than in enclosed, covered receptables intended for that purpose. j.Any automobile body and fender repair work.k.Any flea market or swap meet, “second hand” or “surplus” store excluding national or regional operators such as “Goodwill”. l.Any store in which a substantial portion of the inventory consists of pornography, sexual products, and similar “adult” goods, publications, movies, or videos. m.Any other uses that the GRB deems offensive. 10 68 II. Site Development Standards11 Articles 4 and 5 of the City of Bozeman’s Uniform Development Code should be reviewed in conjunction with the standards outlined in this section. Any redevelopment to buildings constructed prior to the adoption of the new UDC on July 1st, 2019 shall be required to follow the guidelines set forth in Section 38.500.020 of the UDC –“Types of Improvements” (Refer to Appendix II.M for Buildings Constructed Prior to UDC Adoption Exhibit) 69 II. Site Development Standards A.Site Design 1.Professional Competence All design and/or consulting work for any full or partial site development is to be done by, or under, the supervision of a licensed Architect, Landscape Architect, Engineer, and/or Site Planner. 12 2. Site Analysis Before any plot of land within the Bozeman Gateway Project is developed, the Developer of the land shall perform their due diligence, which must comply with the Bozeman Gateway CC&Rs, the updated UDC, and have written approval by GRB. 70 II. Site Development Standards B.Traffic Flow and Parking 1. Vehicular Bridges The Bozeman Gateway has and will have a number of bridges allowing vehicular and pedestrian traffic to cross the drainage ways that occur in some of the green spaces. More importantly, these bridges have a signature design element throughout the project. The following further describes them: a. The largest bridge is located along Harmon Stream Boulevard just before reaching Huffine lane. It will act as a gateway identifying the main entrance to the project. (Refer to Appendix II.C for Bridge Locations Exhibit) b. The 5 other bridges throughout the project will be similar in design while smaller in scale. 13 c.The bridges will allow vehicles to travel over drainage ways while helping to break up the site and provide a sense of arrival for users. d.The bridges will act as traffic calming devices slowing vehicles. e.A paved walk will be provided on one or both sides of all bridges for pedestrian access, where applicable.f.The bridges are made of precast concrete, and incorporate stone, and ornamental metal work becoming an aesthetic element in the Bozeman Gateway. g.Bridges will be lit by pedestrian scale post-top light fixtures. Main Entrance Bridge 71 II. Site Development Standards B.Traffic Flow and Parking 2. Bicycle Traffic It is a focus of the Bozeman Gateway to make transportation via bicycle on, to, and through the project just as accessible, convenient, and safe as by automobile. a.Approximately 2 miles of extensive trail system will run throughout the designated green spaces.b. 10’-0” wide asphalt and 6’-0” wide concrete bike trails will be provided throughout the green space. c. Ample bike parking will be placed throughout the project, conveniently accessing all clusters of buildings (Refer to Appendix II.D for Exhibit of PUD Bike Parking Locations).d. The Bozeman Gateway’s network of bicycle paths will link with and promote the Greater Bozeman Area’s Transportation Plan (Refer to Appendix II.E for Exhibit of Bike Paths and Walkways). 3. Walkways Requirements given here are for walkways without buildings immediately adjacent to them (Refer to Appendix II.E for Bike Paths and Walkways Exhibit): a.Walkways including pedestrian ramps shall be of non-slip concrete or interlocking paving stones,and a minimum of 5’-0”wide.Cross slope shall be limited to 1/4 inch per foot.b.A minimum 5’-0” planting strip shall be provided between the back of the curb and sidewalk where appropriate.c.Pedestrian crossing at streets, intersections and high traffic areas within parking lots will be designed for maximum safety by incorporating the following:•Crosswalks will be made of a contrasting paving material to the surrounding road surface for maximum visibility to drivers. 14 72 II. Site Development Standards B.Traffic Flow and Parking Contrasting Concrete Continuous Sidewalk Paving Stamped concrete will be used for an aesthetically pleasing pattern that ties in with plazas and surrounding sidewalks. •Texture variation of materials that slightly “rumble” automobiles will calm traffic speeds. •Sidewalk paving running parallel with the street will continue over drive cuts to act as visual reminder of pedestrians. All Parking lots throughout the project shall adhere to the following standards and the UDC: a.All off-street parking areas are to be held in common ownership by the property owners’ association or, in a few cases, be held in private ownership with explicit reciprocal parking arrangements for use by the general public in concert with the rest of the project. b. Parking lot striping shall be yellow in color and 4” in width. Disabled-accessible parking striping shall be blue with white cross-hatch. Striping shall be maintained in good order. c. Pedestrian crosswalks shall be designed between the parking aisles to the building for handicap access. d. Pedestrian and automobile conflict should be minimized by incorporating a common pedestrian pathway through the parking lot where appropriate. 4. Parking Lots 5. Snow Clearing a.The peripheral or non-congested areas of the parking lot shall be incorporated for snow storage areas, clear of low planting and graded for good run off. b.Artificial snow mounds should not aggravate snow drifting problems particularly across walks or paved areas. 15 73 II. Site Development Standards B.Traffic Flow and Parking 6. Service Facilities and Mechanical Equipment Concealment All retail and restaurant service facilities including trash enclosures, storage areas, utility cabinets and utility meters shall be screened from public view and should meet or exceed the UDC site plan standards. These components shall become an integrated part of the building design when possible through the following: a.Designated loading areas should be isolated visually and physically as much as possible from the circulation patterns to minimize impact, traffic crossovers, and noise. b.Concealment of these areas can include walls, buildings, gates and landscaping, alone or in combination, however, they must be an integral part of the site.c. Durable finish materials should be chosen to match or compliment the accompanying building. d. Chain link fencing will NOT be permitted. e. The location and placement of wells and associated mechanical equipment shall be screened. 16 7. PUD Road Cross Sections Road cross sections shall adhere to the standards set forth in Appendix X, (PUD Typical Road Cross Sections). 74 Concept Section Across Technology Boulevard Through the Town Center Plaza II. Site Development Standards C. Civic Spaces 17 75 II. Site Development Standards C. Civic Spaces 1. Bozeman Gateway Core -Streetscape The core of the Bozeman Gateway project will be the main street located along Technology Boulevard West starting at Harmon Stream Boulevard and extending to South 29th Avenue. The following defines the elements of the streetscape that will make it a successful community destination: a.Building frontages within the Bozeman Gateway Core shall adhere to the guidelines set forth in Article 5 of the UDC. (Refer to Appendix II.F for Block Frontage Exhibit) b.Buildings should be sited at or near the front property line to create an urban edge. c.The active street front environment will provide a variety of color, textures and variations in building planes. d.A rhythm will be provided by pedestrian scale light poles approximately every 65’. Occurring between light poles, a tree will be planted to provide texture, as well as shade. e.Whenever there is a large length of street frontage without a building, dense landscaping should be positioned to continue the sense of an urban edge. f.Street furniture may be used to enhance the pedestrian experience. g.Canopies and awnings will provide shade and weather protection throughout the street. h. The sidewalk paving should continue into the street at pedestrian/automobile contact zones. The change in surface material provides a visual element that is aesthetically pleasing while creating a safety feature that defines the pedestrian space. i. Technology Boulevard West will be an active street with one lane of traffic going in either direction and separated by landscape boulevard incorporating angled parking along both sides of each lane. 15’ Minimum Width of Walk in Front of Buildingsin the Mixed-Use Core 10’ Minimum Width of Walk in Front of Buildingsin the Mixed-Useand Office/Professional 18 76 II. Site Development Standards C. Civic Spaces 2. Concept Town Center Plaza Concept Town Center Plaza The Town Center Plaza will be located in the core of the Bozeman Gateway and adjacent to Technology Boulevard West. The space will adhere to all the elements listed defining the building frontages above, except those relating to vehicular traffic. Additionally, a cohesive Architectural Vocabulary shall be applied to all exterior facades; this includes facades adjacent to the parking lot within the Town Center Plaza. There will be no “back” of buildings in that all sides of buildings have prominent views to the public and will be treated as such. (Refer to Appendix II.G for Town Center Plaza Location Exhibit)19 77 II. Site Development Standards C. Civic Spaces In addition the space will be enhanced with the following elements: a.The Town Center Plaza may incorporate an iconic tower marking the core of the Bozeman Gateway.b. Landscape and hardscape shall be integrated to enhance the plaza. c. Seating will be placed throughout the plaza, providing a comfortable place to gather. d. Fire features will provide the space with animation at night. e. This plaza may house events for the project such as presentations, shows and holiday activities. 2. Concept Town Center Plaza 3. Paving Materials The use of decorative paving materials, colors, and patterns may be incorporated at building entry ways, sidewalks, access walks, and plazas to promote the identity of the site as follows: a.Decorative paving treatments should reduce glare and visually anchor the building to the landscape. b.Paving patterns should be kept simple and relate to the architectural theme of a building.c. Color should provide contrast while relating to the overall color scheme of the building. d. Concrete bands may be used to define the edge as a transitional tool between differing materials. e. Appropriate paving materials include • Masonry Block Pavers• Brick • Stone • Granite • Concrete, Stained, Stamped and/or textured f. Plaza paving should blend harmoniously with cross walk paving at streets and intersections. Concept Town Center Plaza Holiday Lighting Concept 20 78 II. Site Development Standards C. Civic Spaces a.Civic art shall be an integral part of the plaza design. Any built element is an opportunity to emphasize the artistic expression of the plaza such as manhole covers, paving, railings, overhead structures, signage, etc.b. Fountains may be included for visual attraction, to screen traffic noise, and for their calming effects. c. Art, sculpture and fountains with which people can interact by means of touch, movement and play. d. Sculptures and fountains will be scaled appropriately for the size of the plaza. Locations will not impede pedestrian circulation patterns and line of sight. 5. Courtyards and Usable Open Spaces Tenants are highly encouraged to use the outdoor spaces available to them. These spaces can be covered or open air for dining or store circulation. The following shall govern these spaces: a.Outdoor areas should be visible from the sidewalk on the main street. During hours of non-operation these areas can stay open to the public or may be closed off by gates. b.Paving must match the sidewalk paving unless the space itself is demarcated by a low wall or entrance element.c.Light fixtures, benches and other outdoor furniture will complement the Landlord provided site elements or can be unique; but in context with the Tenant’s overall store design. d.Courtyard spaces may be designed to incorporate shade trees, strategically placed shade structures and fountains.e.In courtyards and usable open spaces, seating shall be designed to maintain a common theme. f.Cafe seating is encouraged in front of buildings along the street. The Landlord must approve all outdoor furnishings. 4. Public Art and Fountains 21 79 II. Site Development Standards D. Green Space 1. Open Space A total of 9.62 acres of open space will be created within the Bozeman Gateway site. There are three significant green open space corridors running from north to south through the property and an additional corridor running from east to west along Huffine Lane. (Refer to Appendix II.H for Exhibit of PUD Open Spaces) The open space areas are open to public access throughout. These open spaces will be enhanced with bike/pedestrian trails and landscaping connecting the site to properties on the north and south. Boulevard trails will provide similar opportunities from east to west along Garfield Street and Huffine Lane. These pedestrian corridors and Boulevard Trails will connect the various uses, activities, and common open space areas within the site and connect the site with adjacent properties on all sides. 22 80 II. Site Development Standards D. Green Space 2. Open Space Along Huffine Lane The Bozeman Gateway will enhance the project’s image to the community through the open space corridor along Huffine Lane by implementing the following into the design: a. A “green edge” has been established along the Huffine Lane frontage for the entire length of the site. b.A hard surface bicycle/pedestrian trail buffered and detached from the roadway has been located within the green setback area. c.The green area has been extensively landscaped. d.Restaurants along Huffine Lane will be encouraged to incorporate outdoor dining and sitting areas. e.Access from Huffine Lane is provided at only three locations 3. Pedestrian and Bike Circulation The Bozeman Gateway will be designed to maximize the pedestrian experience. Getting around the site by foot will be made safe and interesting through the following guidelines: a.Approximately 2-miles of extensive trail system will be provided throughout the green space. These trails, for hiking or biking, will connect to all adjacent properties. b. A transit stop is proposed in the location shown in Appendix II.I (PUD Transit Stop Location). Covered shelter will be integrated with the transit stop once activity levels have been determined to support said stop. This location may contain an information and map display. Transit Stop Plan Concept Transit Stop 23 81 II. Site Development Standards D. Green Space 4. View Sheds Various components of the development may include a landscaped trail system, landscaped parkways, and boulevard trails to mitigate its visual impact. A summary of some of the visual amenities to the project is provided below. a.The tributary to the Baxter-Border Ditch provides a pedestrian walkway through an enhanced drainage way which is visible to traffic approaching on Huffine Lane from the west as well as from the Fowler Avenue/Huffine Lane intersection. b.Upper Cattail Creek (Harmon Stream) provides a pedestrian pathway through the center portions of the project. This corridor is enhanced by landscaping. It is visible from Huffine Lane and the entrance on Harmon Stream Blvd. c.Landscaped pathways, boulevard trails, and open space areas will surround the perimeter of the project providing visually appealing pedestrian corridors connecting the many amenities of the project to the surrounding properties and mitigating the visual impact of the project around the entire site.d. All new utilities will be placed underground and within dedicated utility easements. 24 5. Parkland Parkland for the Bozeman Gateway has been provided for by cash-in-lieu. See Appendix VI. (PUD Parkland Tracking Table). 82 II. Site Development Standards E. Site Lighting and Signage 1. Site Lighting Building lighting is covered in Section IV. The following requirements should govern the design of lighting for roadways, and parking areas. a.Lighting, both street and parking lot fixtures, cannot exceed a height of 25 feet. b.Parking lot light illumination shall be consistent throughout the PUD and shall follow requirements of the City of Bozeman Unified Development Code. c.Parking lot pole impact bases shall be decorative. d.Site lighting shall be 4000K LED, with shielding devices or louvers to reduce horizontal glare. e.Lighting along a Right of Way shall be 3000K LED, with shielding devices or louvers to reduce horizontal glare f. Any canopy, building, or pole mounted lighting fixtures shall meet the cut off shield requirements outlined in the City of Bozeman Unified Development Code. Project Light Fixture Bozeman Gateway Entrance 25 83 II. Site Development Standards E. Site Lighting and Signage 2. Site Signage Tenant signage to be placed on or near buildings is covered in Section IV. All free-standing signage throughout the site will be designed under a comprehensive signage plan (Refer to Appendix II.J for PUD Comprehensive Sign Plan). General design criteria for this signage is as follows: a.3 pole signs and 4 monument signs will identify the project and major tenants.b. All signs will be located outside of the street vision triangle at all entrances into the planned unit development as well as outside of street right of ways. c. Allowable materials for signage construction shall adhere to the standards governing materials used in the building exteriors on Page 52 -53 of this development manual. d. Signs will be illuminated only as permitted by the City of Bozeman Unified Development Code. e. Signs composed of individual letters are encouraged. Backlit or indirectly lit individual letters are desirable.f.Raceways and transformers will be integrated with signage. g. All users wishing to erect signs shall obtain a sign permit from the City of Bozeman prior to construction and installation and must comply with this development manual as well as the City of Bozeman Unified Development Code. Concept Monument Sign Pole Sign 26 84 II. Site Development Standards F. Utilities, Grading and Drainage 1. Utilities Electrical a.All newly installed electrical service shall be below grade. b.All electric meters, transformers, etc., shall be concealed from public view with plant materials or built screening. c.The occupant shall be responsible for obtaining any and all necessary consents or approvals for obtaining electrical service and for the payment of any fees. Telephone a.All telephone service shall be below grade.b.All telephone equipment shall be concealed from public view with plant materials or built screening. c.The occupant shall be responsible for obtaining any and all necessary consents or approvals for obtaining telephone service and for the payment of any fees. Sanitary Sewer a.Installation of sanitary sewer pipe shall conform to local code and practicesb.Sanitary sewer shall be tested for infiltration, exfiltration, and air tested. c.The occupant shall be responsible for obtaining any and all necessary consents or approvals for obtaining sanitary sewer service and for the payment of any fees. 27 85 II. Site Development Standards F. Utilities, Grading and Drainage Water Lines a.Valves shall be placed to provide ease of shut off during water system emergencies. b.Reduced pressure back flow preventers which are not in screened service areas, shall be located below grade in a vault or above grade enclosed in an approved screen. c.Unadorned fiberglass will not be accepted.d.The occupant shall be responsible for obtaining any and all necessary consents or approvals for obtaining water service and for the payment of any fees. Gas a.Gas service shall be provided by the local gas company. b.All gas meters, valves, etc. shall be concealed from public view with plant materials or built screening. c.The occupant shall be responsible for obtaining any and all necessary consents or approvals for obtaining gas service and for the payment of any fees. 2. Grading and Drainage a.Insure preservation of all useful topsoil. Stockpiling of topsoil or other excessive material shall be done so as not to interfere with drainage before, during, or after construction. b.The necessary City of Bozeman and MDEQ erosion control methods shall be utilized to prevent siltation onto adjacent properties and into pipelines. c.Design finished grades to provide positive drainage of all lawns and paved areas. Allow no drainage of surface water towards buildings. d.Slope of parking lots shall be a minimum of 0.5%and a maximum of 4%. 28 86 II. Site Development Standards F. Utilities, Grading and Drainage e.Slope of grass lawns should be between 1.5% and 6%. f.Slopes in excess of 6% are considered to be berms or hillsides g.A maximum slope of 3:1, or 33% will only be used to transition grade from building to hardscape. Rip rap, retaining walls or other means shall be used in places where slope might be greater. h.All grade transitions between off-street parking lot areas and abutting watercourse open space areas shall not exceed a maximum slope of 4:1, or 25% slope.i. On-site material may be used to create visual barriers or mounds acting as screens for the deflection of wind and noise. j. Round off the tops and bottoms of all slopes to avoid sharp transitions. k. Design for fast drainage of areas where snow will be stockpiled. Direct the drainage towards gutters to minimize the effect of de-icing agents on lawns. l. Storm water treatment facilities shall be incorporated as landscape features, effectively screened by use of landscaping, or provided by use of underground detention and storm water management treatment systems.m. Per the UDC, Section 38.410.080, stormwater retention/detention facilities in landscaped areas must be designed as landscape amenities. They must be an organic feature with a natural, curvilinear shape. The facilities must have 75 percent of surface area covered with live vegetation appropriate for the depth and design of the retention/detention facility, and be lined with native grasses, indigenous plants, wet root tolerant plant types and groupings of boulders to create a functional, yet natural site feature. A cross section and landscape detail of each facility must be submitted with the final landscape plan for review and approval. Facilities with a slope up to and including ten percent grade may be grassed and irrigated to blend into the adjacent landscaped area. 29 87 III.Landscape Design Standards30 Articles 4 and 5 of the City of Bozeman’s Uniform Development Code should be reviewed in conjunction with the standards outlined in this section. 88 III. Landscape Design Standards A. Overview The landscape theme for the Bozeman Gateway reflects the desire to integrate an upscale mixed-use development into the surrounding landscape. Concept Seating Area and Bike Parking 31 89 III. Landscape Design Standards A. Overview Open spaces provide the opportunity for environmentally sustainable practices which include the filtration of storm water, snow run off, and erosion control. In addition, these open spaces help control the microclimate through wind breaks, snow drifting and minimizing the urban heat island effect associated with parking lots. These open space corridors also serve as a public leisure component by providing pedestrian and bicycle friendly facilities. Such facilities include internal trail corridors that connect office buildings to retail and restaurant facilities as well as seating and gathering areas and bicycle parking. These facilities provide valuable amenities for both consumers and retailers, including their employees. In addition, any landscape areas within the Bozeman Gateway must meet or exceed the requirements outlined in Section 38.550.050 of the UDC. Huffine Lane Corridor Concept Landscape Plan 32 90 III. Landscape Design Standards B. Vegetation 1. Tree and Shrub Species Species diversity, hardiness, adaptability and maintenance should be considered when selecting each tree for its actual location. a.Most of the existing grassland vegetation on the site will be removed during construction operations.b. Trees will line the roadways and will be incorporated in the parking areas to provide shade. c. Considerations when selecting these trees will include urban tolerance and, if power lines exist in any areas, tree height. d. Shade trees will be planted along trails and in open spaces. e. All trees planted within a right-of-way must be on the city forester list. f. Ornamental trees should be used as accents near plaza spaces, entries, seating areas, and to enhance open spaces. g. Evergreen trees will be used throughout to add winter interest and provide buffering capabilities. h. Shrubs will be placed within the open spaces of the project to provide accents on a smaller scale and bring more color and texture to the landscape. i. Shade trees, and all trees to be installed in the boulevards, off-street parking lots, common open space areas, public plazas and individual subdivision lots will be installed at a minimum of 2” caliper. This size is most readily available and, is less susceptible to vandalism, and provides a more mature tree.j. Evergreen trees will be a minimum of 5’ to 6’ in height. k. Shrubs are container grown and vary in size. l. Wildlife protection may be needed until all plants are established. m. Trees planted in boulevards shall be spaced per the UDC to create a rhythm along the street and to buffer as well as reduce the heat island effect from the parking lots. The public streetscape shall contain a regular spacing of boulevard trees along all streets, both public and private, in concert with landscape features and screening of off-street parking lots; primarily, areas along West Garfield Street and US Highway 191/West Main Street. n. Some trees may be strategically located to allow for views of signage, surrounding mountains and way finding. Seating Area 33 91 III. Landscape Design Standards B. Vegetation Formal Seating Area West of Kohls 2. Planting Beds a. Planting beds will be found along trails, next to buildings, and as a backdrop to plaza spaces and seating areas. b. Shrubs and perennials located in planting beds will be massed together and spaced to provide a mass of plants at maturity without overcrowding.c. Planting beds will be separated from lawns with a concrete, steel, or aluminum edging and have a minimum depth of topsoil of 12 inches. d. A layer of weed barrier fabric with a weight greater than 3.2 ounces per square yard will be placed in all planting beds except in annual planting beds. e. This development manual specifically discourages the use of “pea” gravel. All landscape islands that include decorative rock or gravel as a ground cover shall specify 3”-minus or equal in the landscape plan. Lava rock and bark is prohibited, unless explicitly approved by the GRB. 34 92 III. Landscape Design Standards B. Vegetation 3. Lawns There are proposed irrigated and non-irrigated lawn areas in this development. All lawns shall be irrigated. a.Irrigated lawns typically occur adjacent to buildings, high pedestrian traffic areas, and near seating or gathering areas in the open spaces. Two options are available for the establishment of irrigated lawns. b.Lawns may be hydroseeded or drill seeded. Special care should be taken with this method to protect plant growth from vandalism and weeds during the establishment period. c. Lawns may also be sodded for quicker establishment and immediate effect. Most sod farms in the Gallatin Valley area only produce a blend of Kentucky Bluegrass sod suitable for this purpose. Other sod blends, such as a fescue-blend sod may be appropriate for more water- conservation and is encouraged in this development. 35 93 III. Landscape Design Standards C. Hardscape 1. Site Standard Furnishings To have a unified look throughout the common areas of the Bozeman Gateway development, it will be important to be consistent when choosing site furnishings (Refer to Appendix III for PUD Standards). a. All furnishings should complement the architectural style of the development, as well as be both durable and functional. b. Suggested length for benches should be 6’, made of recycled plastic slats or powder-coated metal. c. The color selected for these should then be used with both the trash receptacles and bike rack. Trash receptacles will be needed in high-volume areas, such as the plaza spaces and seating areas. d. Bicycle racks are proposed to be located near the seating areas and high pedestrian traffic areas. This will accommodate users accessing the open spaces with bicycles. e. Site furnishings will be provided in public plazas, main street, or anywhere pedestrians are expected to gather. Site Furniture 36 94 III. Landscape Design Standards C. Hardscape 2. Outdoor Tables Outdoor seating areas will be provided for office employees, shoppers and those using the hike-bike trails. a.Tables may be small round, square or rectangular with attached benches or associated seating made of either recycled plastic, or powder-coated metal. b.At least one of the tables should provide access as per ADA guidelines. Finish and color should be consistent with all other site furnishings. 3. Boulders a.Boulders will serve several purposes in open spaces. They may be used for landscape enhancement, seating, mechanical screening, retaining soils and providing erosion control. b.Boulders will also be used in and around planting beds for added interest and to separate planting areas from walkways and lawn. Site Furniture 37 95 III. Landscape Design Standards C. Hardscape 4. Asphalt Trails Asphalt Trail Section a.The main trails in The Bozeman Gateway development located along Huffine Lane will be asphalt. b.Asphalt trails are 10 feet in width with a 1-foot gravel border along each edge. Excavation for trail must be a minimum of 12.5 inches. Subgrade for asphalt shall be compacted to 95% proctor density, with a 1-1/2 inch minus crushed gravel base (minimum 9-inch depth). c.Asphalt surfacing should be a minimum 2.5 inches in depth. Slope and cross-slope on all asphalt trails will be designed to meet ADA standards. a.Concrete trails in the Bozeman Gateway are 6 feet in width. b.Concrete trail shall be 4 inches of concrete on a minimum of 3 inches of 1 1/2” minus washed rock base material except through driveways, where 6 inches of concrete is required. c.Concrete trails crossing driveways shall be stamped, colored concrete. d.Concrete shall be a minimum of class M4000 with 1.5 pounds of fiber mesh per cubic yard. e.Slope and cross-slope on all concrete trails will be designed to meet ADA Standards. 5. Concrete Trails 38 96 III. Landscape Design Standards C. Hardscape 6. Plaza Space a.Plaza spaces will be a hardscape area, often with seating and planting beds. For aesthetic value, it is suggested that all hardscape plazas have a component of a colored, textured concrete material. b.Colors should remain consistent with the overall tone of the development.c. A small retaining wall can double as a seating wall to accommodate more users. d. Public art may be located in these areas. 7. Planters a.Throughout the plazas and public areas, planters may be installed and incorporated within larger seating areas. b.Planters may be fixed, permanent structures or large single containers. c.Planters may contain plant stock consisting of dwarf trees, ornamental grasses, perennials or annuals. d.Container or planter size should allow approximately two cubic feet of substrate for every square foot of tree canopy near maturity. e.Individual containers with self-contained watering apparatus are encouraged. Permanent planters may have supplemental spray or drip irrigations, connected to an irrigation controller. 39 97 III. Landscape Design Standards D. Storm Water Facilities The following measures will be taken to ensure that storm water facilities are an aesthetically desirable amenity for the project. a.Drainage basins shall not eliminate the installation of landscape features. b.Drainage basins placed in open space corridors shall be designed to be integrated into the overall landscape, as if a natural occurrence. c.Outlet structures shall be screened with landscape rocks and vegetation. d. All open space areas and associated watercourses will be landscaped. Harmon Stream Open Space 40 98 III. Landscape Design Standards E. Maintenance The concept for landscape irrigation will promote water conservation through designed irrigation systems. Irrigated lawn areas will be on separate zones from shrub and perennial beds and all zones must be on an electric controller system. Occupants of the Bozeman Gateway will be responsible for installing and maintaining their own irrigation systems for any areas within their lease line or lot line. All green space areas will be part of a comprehensive irrigation system that is designed and coordinated to maximize water efficiency while minimizing maintenance of the system. All components will be of a contractor grade; will be designed, installed, and maintained by qualified personnel. All irrigation systems shall be approved by the GRB. Irrigation systems must also adhere to the requirements outlined in Section 38.550.050.I of the UDC. The following are design standards and maintenance requirements for irrigation systems: a.All irrigation main lines shall be Class 160 Polyethylene (PE) pipe and installed with a minimum depth of 18 inches from the top of the pipe. b.Irrigation lateral lines may be either Schedule 40 PVC or class 160 PE pipe. Lateral lines shall be either trenched or pulled. Lateral lines connecting to rotors or spray heads shall have a minimum cover of 12 inches. c.Spray heads may be used in irrigated lawn areas and shrub beds. Pop up bubbler heads may be used in shrub and perennial beds. d.Drip irrigation is an acceptable alternative in shrub and perennial beds. Plant material located in non-irrigated lawn areas will receive drip irrigation for establishment purposes. Drip lines should be buried, or if in lawn areas, should have a minimum of 8 inches of cover. 1. Irrigation 41 99 e.Rotor heads may be used in irrigated lawn areas. Rotor heads will be gear driven and capable of producing the specified output and coverage area and are attached to the lateral line by swing joints or crazy pipe. f.All heads must be placed at a grade so that it is not damaged from maintenance equipment or an attractive nuisance. g.Non-keyed locking valve boxes must be installed to deter vandalism. h.All systems must be connected to an electric controller with automatic programming capabilities. Where feasible, scheduling for the running of irrigation systems should occur between the hours of 10:00 PM to 6:00 AM to maximize water efficiency and to avoid conflicts with use during the day. i.The incorporation of a rain sensor is recommended to conserve water by automatically disabling an automatic irrigation system when rain is detected.j.The water source for the green space areas will be wells with a maximum output of 35 gallons per minute. Occupants have the option of connecting to the potable water source. k.All installations, after completion, must have the contractor submit to the Gateway Review Board (GRB), copies of all “as-built” drawings. In addition, copies of well permitting/registration in formation must be provided to the GRB. The contractor must submit copies of all well pump O&M manuals to the owner and GRB. l.The irrigation systems should be charged in April, after the frost has left the ground and plant material begins to grow. The systems should be winterized by the end of October by blowing out the system using an air compressor. No winter watering is allowed from an automatic irrigation system. If winter watering is necessary, it should be done manually from a water tank. III. Landscape Design Standards E. Maintenance 42 100 III. Landscape Design Standards E. Maintenance 2. Vegetation a.Weekly maintenance will include mowing and garbage collection. b. A noxious weed control program will be established. c. A yearly property check with spot spraying will be completed as required by the weed management plan. This program can also be used to control the weeds in gravel parking areas and walkways with spot application of a weed control agent as required. d. Turf grass areas should have a mow height of no less than 3 inches and be allowed to grow to 4 or 4 -1/2 inches before being mowed again. e. Fertilizing of grass and lawn areas are required and should not be overdone to minimize water needs, mowing and to protect sensitive areas. A fertilization schedule will be determined by a grass specialist. f. Lawns which have irrigation at head to head coverage should have two applications of fertilizer. g. Trees and shrubs located within a water course corridor should be monitored and if deemed that they need fertilization, the use of capsule fertilizer should be utilized. 3. Hardscape a. Sidewalks, asphalt trails, and plaza spaces will need sweeping and/or snow removal depending on use. b.Maintenance of the public open spaces will be provided by the developer, property owner or property owner’s association. 43 101 IV.Building Design Standards44 Articles 4 and 5 of the City of Bozeman’s Uniform Development Code should be reviewed in conjunction with the standards outlined in this section. 102 IV. Building Design Standards A. Overview 45 103 IV. Building Design Standards A. Overview The Bozeman Gateway will consist of different building types, such as office, retail and residential all of which shall have their own style or distinctive appearance. While each building type will have its own unique design characteristics or distinctive appearance, the purpose of this Development Manual is to give a standard of design that can be upheld throughout the entire project. Each building within the project will be reviewed on its own merits. The guidelines for design presented in this development manual apply to all building types, unless otherwise noted. Building types, such as residential (multifamily), that have the same use, may have consistent and similar design features, i.e. common exterior materials, with matching colors, in order that they can be identified as a “neighborhood or community”. Within the Bozeman Gateway, there will be significant variations in design, but all will maintain the highest quality of design materials. Each building type shall have a unique and prominent design feature. Buildings setbacks are defined in Appendix V (PUD Setback Tables). All building designs shall also adhere to the frontage specifications that are outlined in the UDC. The renderings, plans and diagrams contained throughout this Development Manual are based on preliminary schematic design of the project. While they exhibit the project’s overall design intent they by no means present final site conditions, landscaping or building location and architecture. Photos throughout this document are used only to visually emphasis points within the text. 46 104 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior 1. Building Planning All buildings will be sited to create an urban edge as described previously in the overview. The following applies to all building types. a.Buildings and facades should be sited on or near the lease line (lot line minus setback) to maximize pedestrian and commercial activity. b.Store facade construction shall not project beyond the lease line, except for approved projecting elements such as signage, awnings and canopies. c.Significant changes in the plane of facades, including recesses and extruded elements, must be incorporated into the facade design to create interest and provide visual variety. Flat, straight facades which extend across the entire facade width are not permitted. d.Multi-story buildings should be expressive of upper floors. Windows and cornices should add a human scale to the facade.e. The backside of buildings shall include architectural features, light features, materials, color palette and awnings over the doors on all four sides of building elevations. Again, wall-to-wall repetition is not permitted. The following requirements are guidelines for building design dependent upon location: Bozeman Gateway Core a.Store-frontages of buildings within the Core will always account for the ground floor. Offices, residential, or additional commercial may be above. Multi-story tenants are permitted. 47 105 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior b. Some Tenants will have parking in the rear of their store. A second public entrance is encouraged when appropriate. This rear facade and entrance, while possibly varying from the design along the street, will adhere to all design criteria set forth in this document (Refer to Appendix II.L for Bozeman Gateway Core Exhibit). Buildings Located Outside the Core a. Tenant main entrances, as identified in Appendix II.F Block Frontages, may open onto parking. Other entrances to the side or rear of the buildings are encouraged. b. Two story tenants are permitted. Second story tenants must have a dedicated ground floor access. c.Parking should be located in the middle of the site. Grocery Store Exteriors 48 106 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior 2. Building Heights Maximum variations in building heights should be used throughout the Bozeman Gateway to add diversity and visual interest. An expression of each floor on the exterior skin through windows and cornices should be used to maintain a human scale in multi-story buildings. The maximum building height within the Bozeman Gateway shall adhere to the City of Bozeman’s Growth Policy under the designation of Regional and Commercial Services. Building heights may be limited based upon required parking, available parking, and type of use planned. 3. Mass and Scale Building massing and articulation shall be used to “articulate building elements in order to achieve an appropriate perceived scale and add visual interest”, as defined in Section 38.530.040 of the UDC. In addition to the requirements outlined in Section 38.530.040 of the UDC, the following elements apply to all building categories: a.Facades longer than 50’ must have some variation in facade height. A flat facade cap element across long storefronts are not permitted. A change in vertical height between each building module is required. b.Design features such as towers, pediments and other cornice treatments should be utilized to create an interesting elevation profile. All corner buildings shall include a type of design feature directed towards the corner. Concept Retail Scale 49 107 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior c.Adjacent buildings should have unique roof lines and parapets varying in styles and heights. Gables, sheds, mansards and hip roof configurations can be used to add variety to the facades. d.Snow stops shall be used on all sloped metal roof forms where roof edges are above pedestrian walkways. They shall be visually unobtrusive and match the color of the roof. e.Gutters on sloped roofs are permitted and will be mandatory in some areas. Gutters must match the roof color or exposed soffit conditions. Exposed downspouts are permitted but discouraged. Gutters and downspouts must incorporate de-icing electrically heated cables. f.All roof top mechanical equipment will be screened by parapet walls or an architectural screen using the materials or color palette of the building facades. This screen will reach a height that is equal or greater than the top of all mechanical equipment. g.Building should have proportions of openings, cornices, and articulation dictated by the architectural style and vocabulary. The elements should be carefully designed to maintain a human scale to all buildings regardless of building height or size. h.Expression of depth of wall thicknesses should be incorporated as an architectural feature. By recessing windows and entrances, exaggerating wall thickness, and projecting architectural articulations, the facades shall have depth and shadow. i.Columns should relate in scale to that portion of the building which they visually support. The dimension of a column is often lost when its mass is not proportional to its height. Variation in Massing Example 50 108 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior j.Within the Bozeman Gateway, there will be no common demising piers between Tenants on the exterior facade. A common 1” reveal will separate facades. At the connection of facades of varying height, the higher facade Tenant shall provide any required return finish to meet the lower facade. When two Tenant facades are not in the same plane, the facade that is closest to the street will be responsible for wrapping the facade material back and sealing the 1” reveal between the two facades, contingent on order of construction. 4. Architectural Vocabulary Each individual tenant’s façade or building should be unique enough to add interest and authenticity to the streetscape. However, each design must compliment the overall project and feel to create an aesthetically pleasing and equally inviting atmosphere in order to promote and maintain a spirit of community and collective quality. Each building is encouraged to incorporate a significant feature that showcases its identity and independent character. While many key elements of this style are outlined herein, they are not necessarily mandated or applicable to all building types. Each building shall be considered upon its own merit as it contributes to the Gateway as a whole. a.A prominent feature on all buildings is encouraged. b. Arcades, columns, pilasters and arches should be incorporated as appropriate.c. Main entrances should be protected from the elements by either recessing the entrance into the facade or by providing a canopy or awning. Larger canopies and/or additional canopies along the facade are encouraged. d. A change in color and articulation over each building module to reduce the perceived mass of a building is required.e. Corporate or franchise-style architecture must be modified or changed to compliment the overall project. Concept Architectural Vocabulary Natural Stone Example 51 109 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior 5. Materials The use of high quality and durable building materials is required. Materials should create visual interest and coordinate with the overall aesthetics of the development. Materials should exceed the requirements of Section 38.530.060 “Building Materials” in the UDC. The following primary and alternative building materials should be used to create diversity and excellence in design. Alternative materials should be used to accent and enhance the primary materials. Example Storefronts a.Primary: • Brick • Stone / Cultured Stone • Architecturally Enhanced CMU • Architectural Concrete Elements• Architectural Metals (Metal should be a minimum of 24-gauge thickness) • Stucco with strong emphasis on the treatment, color palette, variation in joint detail, pattern, relief, and architectural detail • Granite/Limestone/Other Natural Stones •• Cementous Panels Systems –such as “Nichiha” or “Hardi” or “Alura” b.Alternative • EIFS (Dryvit, Stucco) may be used in limited areas covering a maximum of 25% of any facade. A strong emphasis on the treatment, color palette, variation in joint detail, pattern, relief, and architectural detail must be provided •Painted steel elements or decorative grillwork •Tile Work •Canvas / Fabric, Glass and/or Metal Awnings •Slate Roofing, natural or manufactured•Molded or shaping material such as metal or fiberglass •Stained or Finished Wood is discouraged •Any other creative material approved by the GRB 52 110 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior c. The following materials will NOT be permitted on exterior facades: •Painted Drywall or Sheathing •Painted or Exposed Standard CMU •Slatwall or Peg Board •Field Painted Metal •Plastic Laminates•Plexiglas •Thin Gauge Metal or Metal Laminate •Mirror Finishes •Vinyl or Fabric Wall Coverings •Aluminum, or Vinyl Siding•Chain Link d. Storefronts are encouraged to use dark bronze anodized or similarly darker frames or other colors in lieu of brushed stainless steel finish. e. Exterior materials will be weather resistant and not fade, degrade or in any way compromise the material’s original aesthetics due to weathering, exposure to sunlight, temperature change, or normal wear over time. 53 111 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior Copper Harbor Rendering A cohesive Architectural Vocabulary shall be applied to all exterior facades. There will be no “back” of buildings in that all sides of buildings have prominent views to the public and will be treated as such. 54 112 IV. Building Design Standards B. Building Exterior 6. Building Transparency Transparency requirements as outlined in Section 38.510.030 “Block Frontage Standards” of the UDC shall apply to all facades with store- frontages. This applies to all retailers in the Bozeman Gateway Core. Transparency Example Example Retail Entrance 7. Building Entrances The entrance requirements as outlined by the UDC shall apply to all buildings. 8. Projecting Design Elements Canopies and awnings are highly encouraged. Along with protecting pedestrians from the elements they create an inviting scale for building facades. The following requirements will apply to all building types. a. Minimum height to the bottom of the projecting element is 9’-0”.b. Minimum horizontal projection from the facade is 3’-0”. c. Maximum horizontal projection measured from the lease line is 8’-0”. d. The projecting element should stop a minimum of 1’-6” from the adjacent tenant. e. Design and location of projecting elements shall not create a significant visual barrier to adjacent Tenant store facades. GRB shall have final determinations regarding clearance and sight line issues. f. Tenant name and logos may appear on canopies or awnings in so that they fit the character of the project. 55 113 IV. Building Design Standards C. Building Lighting 1. Exterior Façade Lighting The following applies to all building categories: Lighting for the streets, parking lots, and the adjacent pedestrian walks will be provided with a uniform projected lighting scheme. Every building is encouraged to incorporate The Bozeman Gateway wall-mounted fixtures. a.Wall mounted lighting, such as wall sconces, focused on facade elements are encouraged. Entrances and projecting elements should be highlighted to create a visually lively street at night. b.Light fixtures will be appropriately shielded to prevent glare. A high- quality light design must be incorporated into the overall facade design. c.Light spread from fixtures illuminating elements of the facade my not significantly spill over onto neighboring facades.d.Lighting such as sconce lights or goose necks shall be used to visually break up large building masses at night. e.All ballasts and conduit must be concealed f.Recessed can fixtures in soffits may be used. g. Permanent strings of light bulbs with less than 4 watts per bulb are permitted for use in lighting outdoor spaces. h.Lighting shall comply with all local lighting codes. i. The following exterior lighting shall be used : • LED color temperature of 4000K (highly encouraged)• Metal Halide color temperature of 4000K j. Exposed neon tube or LED string lighting must comply with the City of Bozeman UDC. Well-Lit Main Street 56 114 IV. Building Design Standards C. Building Lighting 2. Exit Signs and Emergency Lights The following applies to all buildings: a.Exit signs and exterior emergency lights shall be installed to serve their intended functions, but also be as inconspicuous as possible. b.The back sides of exit signs which are installed at the storefront entry area shall not be visible from the exterior unless an edge lit type sign is used. c.The quantity and location of exit signs and exterior emergency lights shall be installed as required by code. 57 115 IV. Building Design Standards D. Building Signage 1.General Signage Criteria The following applies to all buildings: a.All signage must be an integral design feature of the Tenant’s store facade or building design. It shall be designed to compliment the context of the entire project. b.Property Owners shall meet the standards of the Bozeman Gateway’s Comprehensive Sign Plan during site design. Additionally, Property Owners shall determine the sign square footage allocation for Tenants/End-users within their building. Tenants/End-users must meet the approved Building Comprehensive Signage Plan as established during the Site Plan process. c.The use of a corporate logo or other established corporate insignia shall be permitted only if specifically approved in writing by the GRB. Taglines or identification of specific products or services are permitted only as approved by the GRB. d.All signage is to be of quality construction. Shop fabrication and painting is required.e.Attachments, labels, fasteners, mounting brackets, wiring, clips, transformers, disconnects, lamps, and other mechanisms required must be concealed from view. Light leaks are not permitted. f.All signage must be water-tight and comply with all code requirements regarding wiring and appropriate illumination equipment. All penetrations through exterior walls must be sealed. g.All permits are the responsibility of the Tenant. All signage must adhere to the City of Bozeman’s Unified Development Code (UDC) and obtain written approval from the GRB. h.Any light used for the illumination of a sign shall be shielded so the beams or rays of light will not shine directly onto surrounding areas. i.All sign structures shall be constructed of non-combustible materials. No combustible materials other than approved plastic shall be used in construction of electric signs.j.LED design is encouraged. 58 116 IV. Building Design Standards D. Building Signage 2.Signage Size and Quantity a. The Tenant’s storefront signage shall be proportional to the scale of the overall store facade design. To encourage design creativity, no maximum letter size has been established, however, the GRB will closely review all signage to confirm the proper facade design to signage relationship. b. The design of the signage must engage the appropriately scaled architectural facade elements which accent the signage. c. Decorative tertiary signage such as blade signs, signage on awnings, decorative icons, and small repetitive window signage that is designed and placed in a manner which further compliments the overall facade design image is encouraged but must be approved by the GRB. 3.Gateway Review Board (GRB) All Bozeman Gateway Tenant’s exterior signs are required to be approved at the concept stage, shop drawing stage, and prior to installation by the GRB. 59 117 IV. Building Design Standards D. Building Signage 4.Permitted Signage Types Halo Type Illuminated Signs (Reverse Channel Letters) a.The background surface for the sign is to be opaque and not reflect the illumination or image of the LED lamps within the letters.b.All illumination must be fully concealed within the letter to not be visible to the public. c.The rear edge of the letter shall be approximately 1” from the background surface. d.Standoff brackets and fasteners visible within the 1” dimension between the background surface. The back of the letter shall be painted to match the background surface. e.Raceways shall be provided to feed power to each letter of the sign. f.Preventative measures must be taken to avoid birds nesting in larger letter sizes. Non-Internally Illuminated Individual Letter Signs a.Included types are dimensional letters or graphics applied directly to the face of the storefront area with external illumination. Signage types include metal, acrylic or painted wood letters. b.Non dimensional letters or graphics less than 1/2” thick are generally discouraged. This signage may be allowed if it compliments the overall store facade design. Non-dimensional techniques include painting, silk- screening, pressure sensitive vinyl, metal applique, or glass etching.c.Signs shall not be placed on a background material which distracts from the appearance of the sign. d.Supplemental lighting must be provided for signage visibility. The supplemental lighting must be incorporated into the facade design either as a concealed fixture or as a design element.60 118 IV. Building Design Standards D. Building Signage Blade Signs a.Store facade blade signs are encouraged. They are required to have a decorative appearance which compliments the store facade design and enhances the Tenant’s store image.b.Blades signs shall not have an area of more that 8 square feet and 5 feet in width. Maximum thickness is 2 inches. c.All blade signs are encouraged to be externally lit. Internally lit signs will NOT be permitted. d.The criteria for Projecting Design Elements under the Building Exterior govern the location and projection of all blade signs. e.Decorative elements such as iron brackets or three-dimensional sculptural panels are encouraged to be used. Show Window Graphics and Lifestyle Images Window signs including business logos and names shall not be more than 25% of the area of the window and should adhere to the City of Bozeman’s UDC. A Halo-Type Illuminated Sign, a Blade Sign, and a Free-Standing Temporary Sign 61 Freestanding Signage Freestanding signage is permitted but shall be approved in writing by the GRB. Freestanding signage shall also adhere to the City of Bozeman’s Unified Development Code (UDC). Window Signs a.Adhesive window graphics shall be approved in writing by the GRB. b.Glass doors may display the address and hours of operation through use of high-quality materials. 119 IV. Building Design Standards D. Building Signage 5.Signage Not Permitted The following sign types will NOT be permitted: •Exposed or surface mounted box or cabinet type signs •Open face channel letters with exposed tube neon •Cloth, paper, cardboard, and other similar stickers or decals on or around the storefront surfaces •Moving, rotating, flashing, noise making or odor producing signs. •Signs which are not professional in appearance as determined by the GRB. •Changing message signs and changing time/temperature signs 62 Freestanding Temporary Signage Temporary signage to be placed on the sidewalk outside of the lease line during tenant hours of operation are encouraged but must be approved by the GRB. These signs must be located as to not impede traffic flow in and out of or past the store. 120 V.Review Procedures63 121 V. Review Procedures A. Conceptual Sketch Review The Tenant must submit information pertaining to the use, size, location, and character of its development. This could include multiple buildings, a single building, or a single space within a building. A schematic site plan showing building location, general landscape areas, service areas, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, site signage locations, and dumpster locations. The GRB’s review should normally take no more than 10 working days from the receipt of documents. 2. Conceptual Sketch Submission Document Approval The GRB shall review the sketch plan submission and return it to the Tenants marked “Approved” or “Disapproved“, as the case may be, with any appropriate review comments. The GRB may disapprove of any sketch plans, location, and style of improvements, exterior colors or finishes, or other specifications for any reason including purely aesthetic reasons, at the sole discretion of GRB. Once the Tenant has received Conceptual Sketch approval from the GRB, the Tenant must submit a Conceptual Review Application (CONR Form) to the City of Bozeman (COB) for their review. Conceptual review comments provided by the COB must be addressed and incorporated into the project prior to continued GRB review. 3. Conceptual Sketch Submission Document Requirements The minimum information required for the schematic design phase of the GRB’s review process is as follows: Site Plan if applicable a. Title, date, architect, Tenant, and sheet numberb. North Arrow c. Scale -Minimum 1”-30’ or larger d. Approximate building area e. General layout of the site showing the building location f.Location of building setbacks, property lines, easements, and other restrictions on the property 1.Conceptual Sketch Submission 64 122 V. Review Procedures A. Conceptual Sketch Review g. Location of sidewalks within the property and parking areas in accordance with the Master Plan Hardscape/Planting Plan if applicable a.Site plan must indicate areas to be landscaped. (Information may be shown on the “Architectural Site Plan” for this phase in lieu of a separate landscaping plan.)b.Plan at a scale of 1”-30’ or larger. c.North Arrow d.Date e.Architect and Tenant f.Project Nameg.Location of building(s), driveway(s), and curb cut(s), and parking, pedestrian, and service areas h.Location and types of hardscape pavement, materials, furniture, lighting, and other amenities Building Plans a. Project Name, Architect, Ground Lessee, Date and Sheet Number b. North Arrow c. Preliminary Floor Plan d. Building Data: Type and use, number of seats when applicable, building area (by use) e.All four building elevations in color with materials clearly designated (any available three-dimensional drawings) Building Signage a. Tenant shall be fully responsible for conforming to all applicable City ordinances.b. Elevation showing all dimensions, materials, colors, and method of illumination is required. 65 123 V. Review Procedures B. Project Review The Tenant must submit information pertaining to the use, size, location, and character of its development and incorporating the comments provided by the GRB and COB during the conceptual sketch plan review. This could include multiple buildings, a single building, or a single space within a building. A preliminary site plan showing building location, general landscape areas, service areas, pedestrian and vehicular circulation, site signage locations, dumpster locations, and all applicable setbacks and easements is required along with the above information. A color schematic elevation(s) showing building form, materials, colors, and signage shall also be provided. The GRB’s review should normally take no more than 15 working days from the receipt of documents. 1.Project Submission 2. Project Submission Document Approval The GRB shall review the project site plan Submission and return it to the Tenants marked “Approved” or “Disapproved“, as the case may be, with any appropriate review comments. The GRB may disapprove of any site plans, location, and style of improvements, exterior colors or finishes, or other specifications for any reason including purely aesthetic reasons, at the sole discretion of GRB. If found to be unacceptable to the GRB, one set of documents shall be returned to the Tenant marked “Disapproved”, accompanied by a written statement of items found not to be in compliance with these Guidelines or otherwise unacceptable. At such time as the documents have been revised to meet the approval of GRB, one completed set of Final Plans will be resubmitted to and retained by GRB and the other complete set of documents will be marked “Approved” and returned to the Tenant. 3. Project Submission Document Requirements The information required for the project site plan review process shall follow the COB Community Development Form SP (Site Plan Checklist). 66 124 V. Review Procedures B. Project Review 4. City of Bozeman Site Plan Review Upon approval by the GRB the Tenant shall submit to the City of Bozeman a Development Review Application (A1) for site plan review as in accordance with the City of Bozeman Uniform Development Code. An approval letter from the GRB shall be included with the submittal to the City of Bozeman. City comments shall be reviewed by the GRB prior to start of construction. In the event the GRB disagrees with the City comments, the GRB will meet with the Tenant and the City to resolve the issues. Construction may commence upon receipt of all necessary permits from the City of Bozeman, approval by the GRB, and the preconstruction conference. C. Construction Compliance Tenants shall submit a Certified Record Survey showing all above and below grade improvements. Improvements Verification The construction of the improvements shall be physically verified by a Representative of the GRB for conformance with the submission approved by the GRB. A Preconstruction Conference shall be required including the Tenant’s Representative, the Tenant’s Contractor, the Landlord’s representative and a representative from City of Bozeman shall be established by the Tenant. This conference shall occur no less than 2 weeks prior to commencement of construction, to ensure that each party understands the importance of adherence to the approved documents. 67 125 VI.AppendixI.Terms & Definitions A. Landlord -“Landlord” refers to the Declarant under the Declaration of Restrictions and Grant of Easements Bozeman Gateway, recorded November 9, 2006, Document No. 22447808, records of Gallatin County, Montana, as amended by the First Amendment (Document No. 2377360), and as may be further amended from time to time (“CC&Rs”). In this Development Manual, the terms “Developer”, “Landlord”, and “Owner” shall refer to the Declarant under the CC&Rs. B. GRB –Gateway Review Board, comprised of design professionals appointed by the Developer. The GRB will be the interpreter of the requirements of the Development Manual, and the GRB’s decision in matters relating to the same shall be final. C. Tenant –Inclusive of all property owners, ground lessees, tenants, and end-users within the Bozeman Gateway. 68 126 II.PUD Exhibits A. Master Site Plan 69 127 II.PUD Exhibits B. Phasing Plan 70 128 05-15-06II.PUD Exhibits C. Bridge Locations Main Entrance Bridge 71 129 II.PUD Exhibits D. PUD Bike Parking Locations 72 Phase 1 –To be constructed Summer/Fall of 2021 Phase 3 –To be constructed Late Summer/Fall of 2021, in conjunction with construction of Site Z.Phase 5 –To be constructed in conjunction with Phase 5 project construction 130 II.PUD Exhibits E. Bike Paths and Walkways 73 131 II.PUD Exhibits F. Block Frontages 74 132 II.PUD Exhibits G. Town Center Plaza Location 75 133 II.PUD Exhibits H. PUD Open Spaces 76 134 II.PUD Exhibits I. PUD Transit Stop Location 77 135 II.PUD Exhibits J. PUD Comprehensive Sign Plan 78 136 II.PUD Exhibits K. PUD Concrete and Asphalt Trails 79 137 II.PUD Exhibits L. Bozeman Gateway Core 80 138 II.PUD Exhibits M. Buildings Constructed Prior to UDC Adoption 81 139 A.Bench Standards PUD Site Benches should be purchased from Upbeat Site Furnishings. Site Benches should adhere to the following specifications, as well as those outlined on the subsequent page: •6’ Parkway Recycled Lumber Flat Bench (Item #FBW6R) •19 ½” H x 23 7/8” W x 72”L, 141 lbs •Cedar colored •Powder coated legs in black Actual PUD Site Bench III. PUD Standards 82 140 141 B.Bike Rack Standards PUD Bike Racks should be purchased from Dero Bike Racks. Bike racks should adhere to the following specifications, as well as those outlined in the subsequent 6 pages: •Hoop Rack –Surface Mount •1.5” Schedule, 40 pipe •Powder Coated –Gloss Black •35” H x 24” W x 6” D III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Bike Racks 83 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 C.Crosswalk Standards PUD Crosswalks should follow the specifications outlined in the subsequent 4 pages, as designed by Morrison-Maierle, Inc. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Crosswalk 84 149 150 151 152 153 D. Landscape Rock Standards PUD Landscape Rock shall be 3”-minus or equal in the landscape plan. Actual PUD Landscape Rock III. PUD Standards 85 154 E. Parking Lot Lighting Standards PUD Parking Lot Lighting should be purchased through Valmont Structures and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 7 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Parking Lot LightsActual PUD Parking Lot Lights 86 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 E. Pedestrian Lighting Standards PUD Pedestrian Lighting should be purchased through a ∙ light and should adhere to the following specifications, as well as those outlined on the subsequent page. •Series X7 •Height –Nominal 3’ •Cantilever –Nominal 6’ •Output –LS LED Standard Output •LED CCT –4000K •Voltage –Universal 120V-277V •Optics –Clear Glass •Mounting –Square Base •Finish –Dark Bronze •Dimming –Standard 0-10 III. PUD Standards Concept PUD Pedestrian Lights (Manufacturers Image)87 163 light X7 | SPECIFICATION GUIDE 4.00” 4.00” SERIES HEIGHT CANTILEVER FINISH OUTPUT LED CCT DIMMING OPTIONS VOLTAGE OPTICS MOUNTING X7 X7 3 6 G 3 6 T BDBO_ 30 3540 D N U 3 G M SDR Nominal 3’Nominal 6” a•lightanium™ Satin BlackDark BronzeOther* 3000K 3500K4000K Standard 0-10 Dimming* New York City Code Universal 120V - 277V 347V Clear Glass Chamfered Base Square BaseDirect Burial* *Reduces above ground height up to 4” once backfilled *Specify RAL# ORDERING CODE X7 G 3 6 3728 Maritime Way | Oceanside, CA 92056 | 760.727.7675 | alights.com PERFORMANCE AT 4000K NOMINAL LUMEN OUTPUT 155 lm/ft 310 lm/ft 2.5 W/ft 5 W/ft 62 lm/W 62 lm/W INPUT WATTS EFFICACY OUTPUT Low Standard PROJECT INFO DATE TYPE QUANTITY LIGHT LOSS FACTORS OUTPUT LS LL - 50% 4000K 3500K - 97% 3000K - 93% 80+ CRI 90+ CRI - 80% LED CCT CRI BASELINE MOUNTING OPTIONS (M) | Chamfered Base (S) | Square Base (DR) | Direct Burial Wet Location Rated *Dimming to 1% stated for standard 0-10v dimming Custom tuned output available from 50% to 200% of standard output. Please consult factory for custom lumen output and wattage. LL LSC_ LED Low Output LED Standard OutputLED Custom Output* *Available from 25% to 125% of LED High Output Type E4 164 F. Wall Sconce Standards PUD Wall Sconces should be purchased through FC Lighting and should adhere to the following specifications, as well as those outlined in the subsequent 2 pages.•Series FCW1039 •Voltage –120V •Source/Temperature –LED 4000K •LED Lumens –700 Lumens •Finish –Bronze III. PUD Standards 88 165 Date:Approved: Type: Fixture: Project: Date:Approved: Type: Fixture: Project: FC Lighting, Inc. reserves the right to change details or specifications without notice. Product use certifies agreement to FC Lighting’s terms and conditions. © 2016 FC Lighting, Inc.3609 Swenson Ave., St. Charles, IL 60174 p. 800-900-1730 f. 630-889-8106 www.fclighting.com JO Rev. 1116 ORDERING EXAMPLE: FCW1039-277V-700-BK-LD SERIES VOLTAGE SOURCE/TEMPERATURE LED LUMENS FINISH ACCESSORIES FCW1039 120V LED 27K 700 Lumens @ direction (27W)BK Black D Dimming (PL 0-10V) 277V 3K 1000 Lumens @ direction (27W)BZ Bronze LD LED Dimming (0-10V) 35K CC Custom Color F Fuse 4K SL Silver BBU Battery Backup, Remote PL 18Q 2/18Q 26Q 2/26Q 32T WH White SPECIFICATION MOUNTING • Mounts directly to recessed junction box. CONSTRUCTION • Corrosion resistant, heavy walled, solid die cast aluminum construction. Semi-recessed die cast aluminum ballast compartment included. • Lens is heat resistant, clear, tempered glass or opaque white. Precision formed semi-specular aluminum for maximum reflectance. • Neoprene continuous closed cell urethane ‘O’ ring gasket to seal out contaminants. • Captive and recessed stainless steel, tamper resistant hex socket screws. LED • Lumens stated are the minimum lumens delivered out of the luminaire. LED lifetime is greater than or equal to 70,000 hours with the lumen depreciation greater than L70. All of our luminaires are tested to LM 80 with a minimum CRI of 80 and color consistency of step 4 MacAdam Ellipse. Integral power supply standard. Input voltage 120V or 277V. FINISH • Six stage chemical pre-treatment process that includes iron phosphate, to prepare the substrate for a UV stable, super durable standard polyester powder coat. ELECTRICAL • Socket PL: Four pin plug-in type compact fluorescent lamp holder (lamp by others). HID: G12 and G8.5 (20W MH only) for MH base porcelain socket. • Ballast PL: Fluorescent high power factor electronic, UL listed ballast standard. HID: Electronic ballast standard. Ballast has a manufacturer issued 5 year warranty. Electronic universal voltage 120V or 277V is standard. Please consult factory for other voltage options. LISTING • UL & cUL/ETL, U.S. and CA listed for wet locations. IP65 rating. FCW1039 Die-Cast Aluminum Interior / Exterior Up-Down Wall Light. Type E9 166 PHOTOMETRY DIMENSIONS PHOTOMETRY FCW1039 FC Lighting, Inc. reserves the right to change details or specifications without notice. Product use certifies agreement to FC Lighting’s terms and conditions. © 2015 FC Lighting, Inc.3609 Swenson Ave., St. Charles, IL 60174 p. 800-900-1730 f. 630-889-8106 www.fclighting.com ML Rev. 3153.5 in8.6 in 4.8 in167 G. Mailbox Standards PUD Mailboxes should be purchased through Florence Manufacturing Company and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 4 pages. Actual PUD Mailbox III. PUD Standards 89 168 169 170 171 172 H. Metal Bench Standards PUD Metal Benches should be purchased through Scarborough and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 6 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Site Bench Actual PUD Site Benches 90 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 I. Picnic Table Standards PUD Picnic Tables should be purchased through Landscape Forms and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 2 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Picnic Tables 91 180 181 182 J. Recycled Picnic Table Standards PUD Picnic Tables should be purchased through Ellie’s Eco Home Store and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 2 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Recycled Picnic Table 92 183 184 185 K. PUD Pylon Signage PUD Pylon Signs should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 3 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Pylon Sign 93 186 187 188 189 L. Trash Receptacle PUD Trash Receptacles should be purchased through Sacrborough and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 2 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Trash Receptacle Actual PUD Trash Receptacle 94 190 191 192 M. Tree Grates/Guard StandardsPUD Tree Grates/Guards should be purchased through Ironsmith Tree Guards and should adhere to the specifications as outlined in the subsequent 3 pages. III. PUD Standards Actual PUD Tree Grate/Guard 95 193 194 195 196 IV. PUD Relaxations Approved Relaxations A list of Zoning relaxations granted by City Commission on December 12, 2005 (per published minutes) for The Bozeman Gateway Subdivision PUD are as follows: 18.18.050.A –Yards.Zero lot lines allowed by 18.38.060. 18.36.060.B –Duration of Final Plan Approval. Allow more time to complete the development than the 2 years from Final Plan Approval. 18.42.040.B –Block Length. To allow blocks to be longer than 400 feet.18.42.040.C –Block Width. To allow blocks to be wider than 400 feet. 18.42.100.B.3.c –Watercourse Setback. To allow encroachment in to 50-foot minimum setback along waterways. 18.42.100.B.4.b –Watercourse Setback. To allow required watercourse setback to not include adjacent wetlands.18.44.030.A.1 –Intersections. To relax requirements to allow streets to intersect at less than 90 degrees. 18.44.090.D.3 –Intersections. To allow average spacing of intersection on Fowler Avenue to be reduced from 660 feet to 420 feet. 18.42.150.D.1 –Parking Lot Lighting. To allow horizontal illuminance to be less than 0.1-foot candle. 18.44.080 –Sidewalks. To allow soft trails in place of concrete boulevard sidewalks along streets fronting open space/pedestrian corridors. 18.44.090 –Access. To relax the average spacing requirements for public streets.18.44.090.B.2 –Drive Access from Public Streets. To exclude the requirement for all lots to have 25-foot frontage on improved public or private street or alley. 18.46.020.D –Backing into Public Rights-of-Way. To allow diagonal parking along Technology Boulevard and Chronicle Lane (South 29th Avenue). 18.42.030.I –Access. To not have access for all subdivision lots from an improved public or private street or alley. 18.18.040 –B-2 Lot Widths. To allow newly-created lots zoned “B-2” with minimum lot width less than 100 feet. 96 197 IV. PUD Relaxations Additional Relaxations A list of Zoning relaxations to be granted by City Commission for The Bozeman Gateway Subdivision PUD are as follows: 97 38.210.010.C –DRB Review. From Conditional of approval #40 “That all site plan review applications within the subdivision will be subject to review by the Design Review Board.” 38.320.050. –Building Heights. From Condition of approval #42 “Building heights will be permitted not to exceed a height of sixty-five (65) feet based on the merits of a residential component for the planned unit development.” 38.320.050.7.b –Building Heights.From requiring a conditional use permit for additional 30% of height in a Regional Commercial area. 38.410.100.A.2.e.(3).(d) –Watercourse Setback.Allow concrete path within a watercourse setback. 198 V. PUD Setback Tables Phase 1 98 199 V. PUD Setback Tables Phase 2 99 200 V. PUD Setback Tables Phase 3 100 201 V. PUD Setback Tables Phase 4 101 202 V. PUD Setback Tables Phase 5 102 203 VI.PUD Parkland Tracking Table(Per City of Bozeman Parks Department) 103 204 VII. PUD Performance Points The City of Bozeman Uniform Development Code (UDC) states in Section 38.430.090.E.2.a.(7) that all PUDs earn at least 20 performance points. The Bozeman Gateway PUD meets the requirement through the use of open space and trail easements. The following is the performance point calculation: 104 205 VIII. PUD Landscape Plans A. Open Spaces 2 -5 105 206 VIII. PUD Landscape Plans A. Open Spaces 6 106207 VIII. PUD Landscape Plans A. Open Spaces 10 107 208 IX. PUD Modification Approvals All Modification Approvals received to date are contained in the subsequent pages. 108 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 X. PUD Typical Road Cross Sections 109 226 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Kellen Gamradt, Engineer II Shawn Kohtz, City Engineer SUBJECT: City Street Lighting Evaluation and Joint Presentation with Northwestern Energy MEETING DATE: January 27th, 2020 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Special Presentation BACKGROUND: In 2017, the City adopted a new street lighting design standard, created by Clanton & Associates, which exclusively specifies light emitting diode (LED) light sources for all newly installed street lights. Prior to adopting this standard, the City specified high pressure sodium (HPS) light sources which were the industry standard at the time. LED lights provide substantial cost savings in comparison to HPS through decreased energy usage and increased lifespan. LED light sources also emit much higher quality light, which results in safer streets for all users. The City was proactive by adopting this new standard during a time when the LED industry was relatively new and rapidly changing. Adoption of an LED street lighting standard was driven by the City’s sustainability program to reduce energy output of the lights and reduce fossil fuel emissions associated with frequent lamp replacement associated with HPS lights. However, as LED lights were installed around the city, there were concerns over the intensity of these new lights and light intrusion into residential areas. The City Commission recognized these issues at the April 1, 2019 Commission Meeting, and a strategic plan priority was created to evaluate the City’s new street lighting standard and lights installed since that standard was implemented in 2017. Upon receiving direction from the Commission, Clanton & Associates was selected through the City’s professional services procurement process to perform an onsite evaluation of City street lights, prepare an LED street lighting evaluation report, recommend updates to our street lighting design standards, and coordinate with Northwestern Energy on their upcoming LED retrofit project in Bozeman. 227 Street Lighting Evaluation In late October, Clanton & Associates performed street lighting measurements at twelve sites located throughout the City. Clanton evaluated nine locations with recently installed City owned LED street lights, two locations with high pressure sodium lights, and one location where Northwestern Energy retrofitted an existing HPS light to LED. The sites were primarily selected based on where light intrusion complaints have been received. The results of this study are included in the attached Street Lighting Evaluation Report. In summary, Clanton found some LED light installations were not meeting the 2017 standard, resulting in light intrusion and high light density on some streets. After reviewing the results of this report, the engineering team researched lighting designs from these projects and reached out to the lighting professionals who completed the designs. The lighting study produced three primary considerations: 1. Recent Advancements in Lighting Technology National lighting standards have lagged behind LED technology in the lighting industry and even today, those standards are based on high pressure sodium (HPS) lights. An important distinction between HPS lights and LED lights is what’s referred to as color temperature. HPS lights typically have a color temperature range between 1900 – 2100 Kelvin which corresponds to a very warm, orange colored light. Alternatively, LED lights typically have color temperatures in the 2700 – 5000 Kelvin range which corresponds to a white light (ranging from “warm white” (2700K – 3000K) to “cool white” (4000K – 5000K) with more blue spectrum light) similar to moonlight. The human eye has adapted over time to be much more sensitive to higher color temperatures during night conditions and therefore, LED lights are perceived to be much brighter at the same lumen output. As a result, national standards that were developed based on HPS lights result in the perception of over-lighted streets when LED lights are used. The LED industry has recently began to shift toward lower color temperature lights. In 2016 the lowest color temperature commercially available was 4,000 Kelvin and just weeks before the 2017 City lighting standard was adopted, 3,000 Kelvin color temperature lights became available. The City’s 2017 design standards were updated to require 3,000 Kelvin color temperature lights with lighting criteria consistent with the national Illuminating Engineering Standards (IES). Generally speaking, higher color temperature equates to better visibility and more energy efficiency, while lower color temperature equates to a more comfortable, less glaring light. Because LED technology is quickly advancing to produce more efficient and better performing light fixtures, it is important to reevaluate the City’s design standards. 2. Lack of Clarity in Design Standards Through conversations with our design professionals and Clanton, it became apparent that some elements of the City street light standards were susceptible to differences of interpretation by design professionals. The current standards give lighting guidelines based on the amount of pedestrian conflict on the street (higher pedestrian conflict streets require higher intensity 228 lighting). The current standards do not give clear guidance on what qualifies as “medium” vs “low” pedestrian conflict which resulted in instances of overly conservative lighting designs. City standards also set lighting criteria based on street classification. For example, an arterial street has higher lighting requirements than a local street. The intent of the standard is to provide additional street lighting for high volume traffic conditions on arterial and collector streets relative to local streets. However, residential land use is increasingly observed adjacent to arterial and collector streets. Our current standards did not sufficiently account for residential land use adjacent to higher volume streets and subsequently, the street lights installed on some arterial and collector streets appear overly bright and have instances of light intrusion on residential properties. This was a common theme in areas of light intrusion, where higher capacity streets receive higher lighting requirements, which are in conflict with adjacent residential uses. 3. Using Old Design Standards Some light installations were designed using the City’s old design standards, even though they were installed recently. Baxter Lane between Davis Lane and North 19th Avenue was designed in 2015; however, due to complications with securing right-of-way and other design delays, the project was not constructed until 2019. The lights on this section of Baxter were designed based on the pre-2017 design standards, and at the time of construction, it was decided not to incur a costly change order to redesign these lights when new 2017 standards went into effect. This resulted in an LED light design and installation, based on an HPS standard. Proposed Recommendations As part of the street lighting evaluation, Clanton provided recommendations to correct existing light trespass issues. These recommendations include light dimming and light shielding. A majority of the issues uncovered during our evaluation can be solved by either dimming or shielding the light. These options are relatively easy and inexpensive to accomplish and can be handled internally by the City Streets Division. Light dimming involves adjusting a set screw on the individual light fixture with a flathead screwdriver (or similar tool) which effectively lowers the wattage supplied to the light and reduces the amount of light emitted from the fixture, similar to a dimmer switch on a residential light fixture. Light shielding involves fabricating or ordering a piece of sheet metal that can be attached to the light head and limits the direction that the emitted light can travel. Our streets department installs light shields on City owned lights, where shields have been determined to be necessary, and the cost is generally less than $100 per installation. Street Lighting Design Standards Update 229 The next step in our process was to evaluate and modify the 2017 City street light design standards in order to reduce unwanted light intrusion to the extent feasible while still maintaining safe levels of light on City streets, to clarify the specifications for design professionals, and to update street light standards to account for recent LED technology changes. Clanton and Associates drafted updates to the 2017 design standards to address the issues observed during the street light evaluation. A draft copy of the proposed revisions are included as an attachment to this memorandum; a brief summary of these changes are described below:  Pedestrian activity levels are clarified by linking them to adjacent land use  Lighting distributions are clarified based on street width  The luminance criteria is reduced 33% from the current national IES standards  House side shields are required in residential areas  On-board manual dimming capability is required on all lights  Designers are required to provide lighting calculations  A light trespass limitation of 0.2 cd/m2 is now required 5 feet behind right-of-way  The backlight-uplight-glare (BUG) rating has been modified to reduce the potential for light intrusion A submittal review checklist has been created to verify lighting designs prior to engineering approval City staff will finalize and arrange for adoption of updated standards through the City’s standard procedure to modify the Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy outlined in Resolution Number 1611. As mentioned previously, LED technology is rapidly changing and becoming more efficient. This creates problems when drafting design standards or designing lighting projects that may not be constructed until several years after adoption of a new standard. During the onsite lighting evaluation, we found locations where lighting designs met all standard requirements for wattage, lumen output, and spacing; however, the street lights still resulted in higher roadway luminance than was required. In the proposed design standards update, we’ve mitigated against this issue by eliminating hard requirements for spacing and wattage, and instead focused on roadway luminance. This change prioritizes the amount of light reaching the street (luminance) and allows for flexibility as LED technology advances. Coordination with Northwestern Energy Northwestern Energy is currently preparing to begin an LED retrofit project in Bozeman. Out of the 3,300 light fixtures in the City, Northwestern Energy owns approximately 1,400 of the street lights, and a vast majority of these lights are high pressure sodium. The City owns and maintains approximately 768 street lights, Montana Department of Transportation owns and maintains approximately 64 street lights and ownership is currently not identified for approximately 1100 street lights. In the spring of 2020, Northwestern Energy will begin the process of retrofitting their lights to energy efficient LED fixtures. Northwestern Energy has already completed a retrofit project throughout the City of Billings and started to retrofit street lights in Helena. In 230 Bozeman, the retrofits will primarily be 3,000 Kelvin color temperature lights; however, in highly sensitive residential areas, 2,700 Kelvin fixtures will be used. In order to take full advantage of the professional expertise of the City’s street light consultant, the City held a meeting on January 7th with Northwestern Energy and Clanton & Associates to discuss the upcoming retrofit project, to share information about LED street lights, and to collaborate based on results of the City’s street light study. The City has also invited Northwestern Energy to this special presentation to the City Commission to discuss the retrofit project in more detail and inform the public about what we can expect this coming spring. Conclusions In conclusion, street lighting is a rapidly evolving industry that requires updates to design standards to ensure expectations are in step with new LED technologies. The proposed standards update is consistent with the City’s needs to balance sufficient light levels for safety on public streets while also limiting light intrusion to residential areas to the extent possible. In order to address light intrusion issues from recently installed LED light installations, City Streets Division Staff will respond within existing maintenance budget limits to make modifications to problematic street lights in the current fiscal year and new budget will be proposed in the next several months to address any remaining unfunded street light modifications in fiscal year 2021 as recommended by Clanton & Associates. LED street lights provide substantial cost savings through increased energy efficiency and longer lifespans relative to the high pressure sodium lights installed using the pre-2017 City standard. In fact, it is becoming more and more difficult to obtain high pressure sodium lamps due to the advantages of LED lights. High pressure sodium lamps are being phased out of the industry such that they will soon be unavailable for replacements. As reviewed during this study, LED lights provide more visible light to City streets at night, resulting in lower light density requirements to sufficiently light streets. Lastly, City staff have worked with Northwestern Energy to coordinate findings of the City’s street light study and updates to City standards with the Northwestern Energy retrofit project. Attachments: Street Lighting Evaluation Report, Proposed Design Standards Update Report compiled on: 01/16/2020 231 232 From:Gary Shanafelt To:Agenda Subject:Aviator project Date:Saturday, April 25, 2020 10:10:19 AM We would like to make a comment to the dept of community development in regards to the Aviator project as noted today in the newspaper today. We think it is wonderful to have the area where this project will take place developed, it will really look swell when it is all completed some day and will add a lot to our community if it is done right. We do think however that better consideration be given to the types and number oflighting allowed on the structures being built in this area and throughout our town. The new building just south of Rosauers has what seems like hundreds of lights onthe building as most shine both up and down and can be seen for miles, in ouropinion way too many. As time goes by and similar projects are approved our night sky will disappear and we will look like any other American shopping mall. Should the sign code be revisited also? A bad example of obnoxious signs would bethe huge "Market" sign out behind Side Winders that can be seen for miles away to the south and in vivid red to boot. Gary & Chris ShanafeltBozeman 233 1 Robin Crough From:Maria Nash <nashmaria@hotmail.com> Sent:Saturday, April 27, 2019 4:50 AM To:Agenda Subject:Dark Skies Attachments:20190427_030326.jpg; 20190427_023922.png Categories:Public Comment I live just South of Nash. Sadly, a builder from MA bought the lot next to us. It has a non state or country flag out front to draw attention, is taller than any of the other houses, and now, they have decided to light it up like the Taj Mahal. Why they moved to this quiet area to build their look at me house I do not know. But now all I can see at night is this guy's house lights. Is this what Bozeman is going to encourage Leverich Canyon to become? I look at that monstrosity next to Rosauers. One thing that I've learned watching Bozeman change over the past 30 years is that whether or not something is quote cool unquote as the girl said in the recent westslope controversy or whether it makes sense for the community tends to fall in favor of quote cool unquote. We are already destroying the nation's number two most fertile agricultural soil. Watch any building site, and you'll see mounds and mounds of rich black soil getting ready to go completely to waste. Why are we allowing our nightscape and Our Stars as well as the rest and peace of our community to be disrupted as well? Please consider making Bozeman a dark sky community. Maria K. Nash, PT, MSPT, OCS Movement Re-education Center Bozeman, MT 406 570 1848 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone 234 1 Robin Crough From:Maria Nash <nashmaria@hotmail.com> Sent:Monday, April 29, 2019 3:36 PM To:Agenda Subject:RE: Images Attachments:20190427_205545.jpg; 20190427_023922.png Huh.wonder what's up with that... I guess truly the important part is that we are spending all this money to cut light polution, then having guys like this one putting up all this exterior lighting, well beyond security driven...born that place next to Rosauers... with I would guess about 40 exterior light. It destroys the nightscape, the stars, and peace of our quiet mountain living. If we are ever to get it under control, sooner is better. I support a dark sky initiative. Thank you, Maria Nash. Maria K. Nash, PT, MSPT, OCS Movement Re-education Center Bozeman, MT 406 570 1848 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: Agenda <agenda@BOZEMAN.NET> Date: 04/29/2019 2:27 PM (GMT-07:00) To: 'Maria Nash' <nashmaria@hotmail.com> Subject: RE: Images Hi Maria, Your two PDFs are corrupted and I’m not able to open them and include them. Please resend a different version, or let  me know if you’re fine with me sending this comment on with your other two images only. Thanks, Robin Robin Crough, MPA | City Clerk City of Bozeman | 121 N. Rouse Ave. | Bozeman, MT 59715  D: 406.582.2321 | C: 406.600.1057 235 2 www.bozeman.net           From: Maria Nash [mailto:nashmaria@hotmail.com]   Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2019 4:51 AM  To: Agenda <agenda@BOZEMAN.NET>  Subject: Images Maria K. Nash, PT, MSPT, OCS Movement Re-education Center Bozeman, MT 406 570 1848 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may  be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender  and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record  retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be  protected from disclosure under law. 236 237 238 239 From:Maria Nash To:Agenda Subject:External lighting Date:Monday, April 15, 2019 6:27:24 AM One of the things that makes Bozeman such a great place to live, is the night View and theStars. We have such a great night scape because of limited amounts of light pollution. When I look at businesses like the one next to Rosauers, I am appalled that we are so focused on beingtrendy and cool that were completely willing to sacrifice any efforts to continue to build in such a way that supports our beautiful view of the mountains during the day and are beautifulview of the stars at night. I'd like to request that we Implement some sort of regulation on external lighting. Living off of Nash Road, I know that I have one neighbor who's decided tocome in and light his house up like the Taj Mahal. Just that one house in our subdivision as it travels up toward leverich Canyon has completely mangled our night view. It's so frustratingto lay in bed and look outside and just see his house lit up like a torch instead of being able to lay there and look at Orion, which was my normal View. Certainly, there is also aconsideration of the environment as we are allowing places like this one next to Rosauers to consume who knows how much energy lighting that place up like that. It is unattractive,wasteful and does not contribute to Bozeman being the best place. Maria K. Nash, PT, MSPT, OCS Movement Re-education Center Bozeman, MT 406 570 1848 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone 240 1 Sarah Rosenberg From:Martin Matsen Sent:Thursday, March 18, 2021 9:39 AM To:Sarah Rosenberg Subject:FW: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Attachments:Copper Harbor Light Info.pdf From: Martin Matsen Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2019 9:56 AM To: 'Kathleen' <kathleen@mdandi.com> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'James (Jim) A. Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <josephcobb@gmail.com>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Kathy, Thanks for the reminder. I have attached the information I had with me at the last meeting. Let me know if you need anything additional. - Marty MARTY MATSEN, AICP Director | Community Development | City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 Office: 406.582.2262 | Mobile: 406.589.5480 | mmatsen@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net ⌂ Planning ⌂ Building ⌂ Historic Preservation ⌂ Affordable Housing From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 3:27 PM To: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'James (Jim) A. Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <josephcobb@gmail.com>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: FW: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Hi Marty, Just following up to see if you received my email below. I hadn’t seen anything come through yet, so I wanted to make sure this didn’t get lost in the shuffle. Thanks! Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator 241 2 Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2019 10:27 AM To: 'Martin Matsen' <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'James (Jim) A. Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Danielle Garber' <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Hi Marty, I just wanted to follow up regarding our on-site meeting this morning. Firstly, I wanted to thank you for taking the time to come out and meet with us. It was very helpful. I also wanted to ask that you send over the photos and exhibits you showed us, illustrating the main issues that need to be addressed. We would like to have them for reference as we move forward on researching solutions. We will begin discussing and exploring potential solutions. I will circle back with you once we have gathered enough information to give you a timeframe for when we expect to have everything resolved. Thanks again, Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com From: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 2:06 PM To: 'Kathleen' <kathleen@mdandi.com> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'James (Jim) A. Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <josephcobb@gmail.com>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Kathleen, Thank you for circling back on this as your earlier email got buried in my in box. The sections of the code we are struggling with on this one are the following: Sec. 38.570.040. - Site lighting. G.Miscellaneous site lighting specifications. Except as otherwise allowed in subsections E and G of this section, all lighting must comply with the following requirements: 3.Except for residential lighting, street lighting, pathway intersection lighting and security lighting, all lighting must be turned off between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Exceptions will be granted to those businesses which operate during these hours; such lighting may remain illuminated only while the establishment is actually open for business. 242 3 4.Vegetation screens may not serve as the primary means for controlling glare. Rather, glare control must be achieved primarily through the use of such means as cutoff fixtures, shields and baffles, and appropriate application of fixture mounting height, wattage, aiming angle and fixture placement. 5.All outdoor lighting must be designed and located such that the maximum illumination measured in footcandles at the property line may not exceed 0.3 onto adjacent residential properties and 1.0 onto adjacent commercial properties and public rights-of-way. As I mentioned in an earlier email I believe part of the cause of this is not just the wattage of the bulbs/ballasts but the reflection off the light colored exterior and the sheer number of lights. When we measured at the property line (see #5 above) our meters read 2.0 into adjacent properties. Granted our meter is a simple one and you may be able to provide better data. I agree that you need a path forward and I struggle to find a simple method of mitigation other than further reduction in the wattage. I am open to discussion but as I have mentioned I am getting complaints and need to enforce the code that is in place. Please reach out with ideas or questions. As soon as a solution is agreed upon we should be able to break the sign permit loose. Best Regards, - Marty MARTY MATSEN, AICP Director | Community Development | City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 Office: 406.582.2262 | Mobile: 406.589.5480 | mmatsen@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net ⌂ Planning ⌂ Building ⌂ Historic Preservation ⌂ Affordable Housing - From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 1:40 PM To: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'James (Jim) A. Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <josephcobb@gmail.com>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: FW: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Importance: High Hi Marty, I wanted to reach out to you again regarding the notice of code violation we received on Copper Harbor. I spoke with DCI Engineers this morning and they informed me that their sign permit is still being held because of this outstanding violation. I was a little surprised to hear this, considering I hadn’t heard anything back since my last email to you on August 5th. I also haven’t received any other correspondences from the City on this. 243 4 If you would please let me know where we stand on this issue as soon as possible, I would greatly appreciate it. If our lighting is still being considered as in violation of code, this would be good to know…so we can address if further. I would also appreciate it if you could answer the few questions I had outlined in my prior email to you (copied again here): Could you provide some clarification on how the lights are being measured? The initial letter we received stated that the “maximum illumination on any vertical surface or angular roof surface may not exceed 5.0 average maintained footcandles”, which is what we based our modifications off of. In your last email I noticed you stated that the light output was being measured at the property line. I’m a little uncertain now of how we should be approaching remedying this issue. For the sake of our understanding, could you clarify the following for us: - Where are the light measurements being taken from (property line, façade, etc.)? - What equipment is being used to take the measurements? - What is the acceptable brightness in terms of footcandles? Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter. Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Monday, August 5, 2019 11:18 AM To: 'Martin Matsen' <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <Josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Jim Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; 'Danielle Garber' <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Hi Marty, I appreciate you taking into consideration the color of the exterior; we have realized throughout the readings we have done that this does make an impact on how bright the lights appear. I can verify that the work has been completed…Please see the attached analysis showing what the lights were before the ballasts were changed, and what they are now. Could you provide some clarification on how the lights are being measured? The initial letter we received stated that the “maximum illumination on any vertical surface or angular roof surface may not exceed 5.0 average maintained footcandles”, which is what we based our modifications off of. In your last email I noticed you stated that the light output was being measured at the property line. I’m a little uncertain now of how we should be approaching remedying this issue. For the sake of our understanding, could you clarify the following for us: - Where are the light measurements being taken from (property line, façade, etc.)? - What equipment is being used to take the measurements? - What is the acceptable brightness in terms of footcandles? 244 5 Thanks Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com From: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 2:17 PM To: 'Kathleen' <kathleen@mdandi.com> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <Josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Jim Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Kathleen, Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Danielle is drafting a letter with specifics and code language but in the interest of time I wanted to let you know that our Code Compliance Officer has just this week measured the light output at the property line and the lights are too bright to meet code. Please verify that the work was done and if there are any other options to reduce the output. I am fielding a lot of complaints on this and I need to provide some answers as to what is being done. I am sure that the color of the exterior is some of what makes this building appear so well lit but the public is demanding to know why I am allowing this. Thanks for any help you can provide to resolve this issue. Best Regards – Marty MARTY MATSEN, AICP Director | Community Development | City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 Office: 406.582.2262 | Mobile: 406.589.5480 | mmatsen@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net ⌂ Planning ⌂ Building ⌂ Historic Preservation ⌂ Affordable Housing From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 10:14 AM To: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <Josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Jim Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Hi Marty, That’s strange. We replaced all the ballasts on the exterior lights so that we could reduce the lumens. I had been informed that the work was completed. We would be happy to meet with a city inspector over at Copper Harbor 245 6 sometime to look at the lights together if you’d like. Please let me know if that would be workable and if so, what days/times might work to meet. Thanks Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com From: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 1:52 PM To: 'Kathleen' <kathleen@mdandi.com> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <Josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Jim Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net>; Danielle Garber <DGarber@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Hi Kathleen, Our inspector has visited the site and using photos that were taken prior to the issuance of the violation he cannot see any visual difference in the light fixtures. Could you please let me know how the lights were brought into compliance? Thanks so much. - Marty MARTY MATSEN, AICP Director | Community Development | City of Bozeman 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 Office: 406.582.2262 | Mobile: 406.589.5480 | mmatsen@bozeman.net | www.bozeman.net ⌂ Planning ⌂ Building ⌂ Historic Preservation ⌂ Affordable Housing From: Kathleen <kathleen@mdandi.com> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2019 2:07 PM To: Martin Matsen <MMatsen@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: 'Ted Mitchell' <ted@mdandi.com>; 'Karen Mitchell' <karen@mdandi.com>; 'Joe Cobb' <Josephcobb@gmail.com>; 'Jim Ullman' <jullman@m-m.net> Subject: Notice of Code Violation - Copper Harbor Lighting Mr. Matsen, Attached please find Mitchell Development Group’s response to the Notice of Code Violation dated April 16th, 2019, for the property located at 1040 & 1060 S. Fowler Ave. We appreciate your attention in this matter. Please let me know if you have any questions or need any additional information. 246 7 Regards, Kathy Brewer Bozeman Gateway Administrator Mitchell Development & Investments 2880 Technology Blvd W, #195 Bozeman, MT 59718 Cell: (406) 531-5356 kathleen@mdandi.com City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. City of Bozeman emails are subject to the Right to Know provisions of Montana’s Constitution (Art. II, Sect. 9) and may be considered a “public record” pursuant to Title 2, Chpt. 6, Montana Code Annotated. As such, this email, its sender and receiver, and the contents may be available for public disclosure and will be retained pursuant to the City’s record retention policies. Emails that contain confidential information such as information related to individual privacy may be protected from disclosure under law. 247 Light spill notaccounted for inphotometric plan.Cornices not effectiveshielding for full cutoffcompliance.Light spill notaccounted for inphotometripplanysrm ^M\^ y < ?t^^^w^^-1.',-WftIsS.s*-£:-/*m?nimlmi™,w'it)Mnncn>t•.fflirrft>i^,(iriru^ik*(Lf0iM^S^gm^sx^^'fcS-;^.'-.:-S&s•s^248 9/5/2019Sec. 38.570.040. - Site lighting.A. Parking lot lighting.Bozeman, MT Code of OrdinancesTable 38.570.040-1Basic1Security2Minimum horizontal illuminance in maintained footcandles0.20.5Minimum vertical illuminance in maintained footcandlesUniformity ratio, maximum: minimum0.120:010.2515:00Source: Parking Lot Lighting, Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 1998.1 Basic lighting provides for the safety of customers and employees during business hours, and for the securityofon-site, outside storage of goods and/or materials.2 Security lighting provides for the safety of employees during nonbusiness hours, and for the security of on-site,outside storage of goods and/or materials.B. Building entrances. Illuminance for building entrances (including commercial, industrial, institutional andmunicipal) must average 5.0 maintained footcandles.C. Car dealership lighting.Table 38.570.040-2AreaMaximum Illuminance on Pavement (in MaintainedFootcandles)Uniformity RatioMaximum: minimumMain business districtsAdjacent toroadway10—205:01Other rows5—1010:01Entrances5—105:01Drive aisles2—310:01Secondary business districts1/4249 9/5/2019Adjacent toroadwayOther rowsEntrancesDrive aislesBozeman, MT Code of Ordinances5—102.5—52.5—55:0110:015:011—210:01Source: Lighting for Exterior Environments, Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 1998.D. Service station or gas pump area lighting.Table 38.570.040-3Area DescriptionAverage Illuminance on Described Area (inMaintained Footcandles)Approach with dark surroundingsDriveway with dark surroundingsPump island area with dark surroundingsBuilding facades with dark surroundingsService areas with dark surroundingsLandscape highlights with dark surroundingsApproach with light surroundingsDriveway with light surroundingsPump island area with light surroundingsBuilding fagades with light surroundingsService areas with light surroundingsLandscape highlights with light surroundings1.51.5522122103322/4250 9/5/2019 Bozeman, MT Code of OrdinancesSource: Lighting for Exterior Environments, Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, 1998.E. Site lighting support structures. The ballasts; pole type, strength and anchor bolts; and pole foundation mustbe appropriate for the proposed lighting and must be installed per the manufacturer's recommendations.Height must be measured from grade. Except as allowed in sections 38.570.050 and 38.570.070 of thisdivision, light poles for parking lot lighting may not exceed 25 feet.F. Site lighting installation and maintenance.1. For new installations, electrical feeds for fixtures mounted on poles must be run underground, notoverhead.2. Poles supporting lighting fixtures for the illumination of parking areas and located directly behindparking spaces must be placed a minimum of five feet outside the paved area or on concrete pedestals atleast 30 inches high above the pavement, or suitably protected by other approved means.3. Lighting fixtures and ancillary equipment must be maintained so as always to meet the requirements ofthis section.G. Miscellaneous site lighting specifications. Except as otherwise allowed in subsections E and G of this section,all lighting must comply with the following requirements:1. All outdoor lighting, whether or not required by this section, must be aimed, located, designed, fitted andmaintained so as not to present a hazard to drivers or pedestrians by impairing their ability to safelytraverse and so as not to create a nuisance by projecting or reflecting objectionable light onto aneighboring use or property.2. All outdoor lighting fixtures must be shielded in such a manner that no light is emitted above a horizontalplane passing through the lowest point of the light emitting element, so that direct light emitted abovethe horizontal plane is eliminated.3. Except for residential lighting, street lighting, pathway intersection lighting and security lighting, alllighting must be turned off between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Exceptions will be granted to thosebusinesses which operate during these hours; such lighting may remain illuminated only while theestablishment is actually open for business.4. Vegetation screens may not serve as the primary means for controlling glare. Rather, glare control mustbe achieved primarily through the use of such means as cutoff fixtures, shields and baffles, andappropriate application affixture mounting height, wattage, aiming angle and fixture placement.5. All outdoor lighting must be designed and located such that the maximum illumination measured infootcandles at the property line may not exceed 0.3 onto adjacent residential properties and 1 .0 ontoadjacent commercial properties and public rights-of-way.6. Externally illuminated wall-mounted and pole signs must be lighted by fixtures mounted at the top of thesign and aimed downward; ground-mounted sign lighting may be used only for monument style signs.Fixtures used to illuminate signs must be aimed so as not to project their output beyond the sign.7. Floodlights, spotlights or any other similar lighting may not be used to illuminate buildings or other sitefeatures unless approved as an integral architectural element on the development plan. On-site lightingmay be used to accent architectural elements but not to illuminate entire portions of buildings. Whereaccent lighting is used, the maximum illumination on any vertical surface or angular roof surface may notexceed 5.0 average maintained footcandles. Building facade and accent lighting will not be approvedunless the light fixtures are carefully selected, located, aimed and shielded so that light is directed onlyonto the building facade and spillover light is eliminated.3/4251 9/5/2019 Bozeman, MT Code of Ordinances(1) Directional fixtures used to illuminate flagpoles (state, United States and/or foreign nations) maybeyond the flagpole.8. Lights that flash, move, revolve, rotate, scintillate, blink, flicker, vary in intensity or color, or useintermittent electrical pulsation are prohibited.9. Translucent awnings and canopies used for building accents over doors, windows, etc., may not beinternally lit (i.e., from underneath or behind).10. Searchlights, laser source lights or any similar high-intensity light are not permitted, except inemergencies by police and fire personnel or at their direction, for meteorological data gatheringpurposes, or for special events if a permit is obtained from the review authority.4/4252 0(T)^(5;®©w1;\\s\&.o 5.u t.o ti.tt2^.i'-tS.ii l.c t.ot.1.. I/":••\<,)!l>,,.S;.,t..^,;1^^5^JiS.* b.i1.1,1-i-i^. 4.1 6.<y^-t:,.,,:.^'\h>*'-t^jte^., 1./'•.^%i.,..."^•^^•...^..—t.. i.. t.. >.. »^TK>.,,,(^1,,,^^,l.3 S,t l.i 6,-. S.a '>.« 1l.0i.i i.i t.i s.z b.o ^.n l.Nl.o^^l.1 l.2 t.4 &.2 l.0 t.0 l.C S.O1.; l.1 t.1 t.2 l.0 i.a i.i: S.orrm.-s a.h.N ^.5 tl.l h.\\\!i.o l.c I.a l.b l.nTypical FacadeSection:Avg: 11.28fct.o St.o t.c S^.n d.r, Ti.ati.n 'hLa S.c t.n 6.1 l.iI.JlS.i V9 1.:i.o ^.c l.o S.i l.iito-aSTh^t'sti.c l.c l.o R-rftab.c i.d.-,,.,\S.o l.c 1.0!..,.>5'E-.1.;-J1[.I ^3^.3l.0 l.C l.1 Uj_ll.S1, .^..>•„.,;.'!.< l.<b.c 1.1 ti.i i^j;l.B 1.1^"1i.: S^•^'^*S.l i.l -ti.l t?lS&,; i.2 Tl,3 •0.3 ?.)t.^-r^.^ ^^>.^6.o l.c It.0 t.C t.1d.. ;;l.U tl.l ;1t.l ti.J ST^b.h.» t.o l.ch.ft\\////|Typical FacadeISection:|Avg: 13.00fcl.ti 6.; li.a S.z°*:TT•<,t^23M^>^<E^.6.1 i.i S.i S.i I,Y7 ^-^ !x^t^.iyt^.^.9 h.i i.i ti.i t>.i i.•\.^^ ^.i\i \.^^ s.i ^t.e h.2 t..;t.i t.i 6.1,^ ;^ ^, ^^ ^ ^, ^^ it-«^s~^f-U-^'IA i-I>lk '2.» ^.U S.< \.a '2.4 fs.r S. /..» ti.' t.i ^.l l.b 1.'••• '.i.^.. >., (,A<>.. ».,y^., f^T^^-f^:, t., ^lf\v*.- >^\,V-r<. i.,\^!..... i., <., ^., i., i., •., ^., i', l...'-^ '•• •-/-\ \ \ \(,.i•-•^^b.ii.i,'TOW^^».2 l.1 t.1l.d I,oi4.2:6.1 La q.»'.,t.z S.o It.i E•u.< d.z tl.3 I,.. ^-{^1...J'^lt^y-f^t.S 1.5 '1,6 1.5 l,|-li^-?3^1[^&<.^.) 1.2 1.2 ^.|l^^-1.^^.4 y2.a*)£.;\2 1.0 1.11 l.|^.fl1)0;•i6.»lf^^.s 1,; l.i l.o l.l^i •>./l.^l^loi.ii.a S.< l.i l.i 1.1 l.|l.s •-.2.St V^i. l33.afru S.i 1.6 1-fC^.l I.-•.l[).t\^.» \.-, \.l \.U^..K'-'i£L.mi:^,TBtAWTji ;.»•*•.» ^., ^-^•i.^.i^^.yfi.K|t is<^»<.9 ^Y? i.<l\<!.0•I,S '1.4 I.-, y<i •I.-!';1.2 1.1 1.l.2 \.l l.1 ^O^y.Il.1 l.S \.tl.S l,< l.< ^3^.5/1.31.^T»~ln*-1..6 ^.5 '4.6 S.it^l^l.T 1.t S.* S,< l.i ^.s^s^.oi.i i.7 i.^.c\iT:\\.li.u ^\\'^ -•.iii.^^^.ii i.^^'^/i.rs^^Ti •i/^^.i«.. ^\^.. ^^..^tT^~'l.i\,^^., f?T=}.!l4.7 l.i i.2 h.3 n-.ii^'l^.^i.n n.^'f'i-o u^ii^.|i,sh.^.ilt,o».t S.J 6.3 S.i^.s^L^'e-9 6\ 6.f l.t ^.E^^.36.4 ^-(f.; i.<S.C\.\1.. C^,.< l.2 k.l t.3 i.iT^'y^.3 ti.iVr'i.-; s^./'i.A.; i.- t.i i.3t.c i,\^ti.c ij.^,) s.i 1.1 t.s l.i>x^»/'i.(i a.i h.< t.< is^^,-is.2 1.3 i.s 1.3 i-r-i.L1,0 "1.1 '1.5 \.1 1.1 S.z l.i t.. l.il.a l.i 1.0 6.3 l.3 l.3 1.1 l.< l.ob.i S.: t.s ".3 1- 1.0\ \ \ spnll.i]r-l.i \.s 1.5 S',T~i.«\^.itr-r^-•f-<y^/^h.(b.t s.i i.s\ft.A^^\.^ \.,,.,>—!^1,., 1., i.Tl...^,./.,/,.,,p^= >.. '•Ah.. t^,-;.,/.„>'^'•••i.V^/i..«)l.< tl.* Yl 6.4 tl,.l'17.Ctz.c1:(.)*>».!l.7S.it.<\l.t,t;.<h.i. t5s.ct.0V21.5\\t.•-\\^T^East ElevationSCALE, 1/&" • I' -0"©©0d)@0 ®\E.B 6.a S.o SS.o tb.o l.o l.c 'i.t Si.o •i.o l.oFypical Facadel.0 t.Q t.C ^&.n l.o S.o ti.oSection:b.n b.u t.i; ti6,u ti.u *i.u ti.uAug: 4.27fct.2 S.t t1.; t)>.< Tl.7fctli.btoS.tAKt(:.o h^., .T"'"".""'1^sw\^?s6.0 S.o l.c S;,z^n,2 S<.1-^.1 l.0yt.b I):Ti.o i.c ie.?ii.a^s.s€><£?>•l.ih.D i.u l.c ??^4^4.2ti.?^-Arf-Tim-»1I?.'li.o 1.a l.i tr»--lsy.*.^ ^ 'b.0 b.1 l.1 S.4 1.5t.1 I(.^ l.^^S.i l.<l.3 tt,.l -U.l tl... tl.. tl1^/>., II.) l.1 l.<6.3 t.3 l.i Si..,\1., -L^t.,^.i t.i <i.i F.i.o t.c @3.i.& S;.<li.ita.o 1.0 v.t 2<,i^s.6.a S.o t.i ?7r^.<b.o I.B 1.1 nn.ib.o i.o t.i ^.1 a..!t.u l.n l.^ 5-^ 'J.a\S.O l.3 tS.o l.i t.i l.i t>.o S.o li.o\'i.l.o S.ii t.i S.z l.i l>c?7rm.» i.ii.o s.ii s.o 1.1 ls.i sli.i i.i l,; l.i i.o il.a i.o l.i 1.; l.it.1 l.1 l.i (.- >.. ».. I.. l.c^, ^, ,,,, (^\\\//, ^.i Ti.2 a.2 6.1 ^.i S.l ^.l.-t, •1.1 l.3 ^•_B__^^1_,f.rwrww^1 • •l^TTB-i^^pX^l..^Y^^t^y<..^^.,t-1'/l.7 '1.1\> L3/^> *>•> l.^.-'t-\is ^.1 ^.< ^.5\^/> S.< i.' ^.1 '-.I:t-^..l 1.8 ^.3 i.1 ^.0 i.t S.) l.-i^.Cl-l\.^ikk< l.s S.y/i\<(. S.-. •l.< ^.7^•^.-s ^S-TT/t.!> l.i l~^<u Lh l.t\ \?-.L ?i.i S-i <i.i ii.i ! i.i t.1 n.1 ?i.E.i S.i E.i 'i.i 6.1 l.i I.i S,i St.i l.i E.i S.i 6.1 l.i l.2 S.i 1.4t.l S.S E.l S.2 S.2 l.3 l.3 S.3 1.1;1|3 l.7 l\ ^.ft.7 b.» b.s i.i li.i l/^'.I \.!>\'i'^B l.1 l.I^tr<C 1.2 '..3 \\^ }t.<I.. >., I., 1, 111..-, 1', ^.;-' '••'\//Typical FacadeSection at 40%s•^7':^^Output:Avg: 4.84fc/y "\\r •••;;,... ^y^.^s^*5l.i b., \.\VS^yt,u.; 'i^'i.y S;^.1 -1.6 1.7 -1.t4i).(>la.t^..1 1.2 1.l6.1 Tt.tH.Il I.is.i^7.26t>.t h.7 I.-) l.S\'.„,..It.Bl.< 6.-- 6.^t.7 l.7 l.'V*.^s.li.r^.o 'j.i^^Jib.B •b.-' <>.l I.S ^~^.;1.) S.B"sw\1.5^B-^»-JiL^-l.C<s.;fc.*s;^ l^jL^ii^-t^.i.sE.sti.il i.o S.c l.c i '- la.\U.ts*,l^.t\l.l t.l l.1 E.2fot.- S.i t.i I.;l.2 l.2 S;l.3^.,b. ^(,0i.2 l.2S.2l-y^.» Ii.i l.» t.il.i b.2 6.]l.3 S.2 l.1i.o I.s S.i 6t.3 l.2l.an-s.» o-> 1,1 il.i t.i E.]0.11.; ^.1 l.1i.a Il.0b.3 l.1t7<~'t>.< 0.1 lI&.O t.I 1.1 t.1b.i l.i l.iLa l.3 t.atj.l 6.3\l>\1•J^T^Eost Elevation - 40% OutputSCALE; 1/ft' ° I' -0"253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267