The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutFeb 19 2021 City email1 Nicole Olmstead From:Ron Isackson Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 2:43 PM To:'Patrick Boel' Cc:Nicole Olmstead; Zack Graham; Connie St. George Subject:FW: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Hi Patrick, The City Engineer reviewed this and is in agreeance with us that the new luminaire should not be required and we can disregard the comment. See below for City email. Let us know if you need anything else on this. Have a good weekend! Ron Ron Isackson PE, PEng Civil Engineer 406.922.7107 | cushingterrell.com Cushing Terrell is an affiliate of CTA From: Karl A. Johnson <kajohnson@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Friday, February 19, 2021 1:32 PM To: Ron Isackson <RonIsackson@cushingterrell.com> Cc: Zack Graham <ZackGraham@cushingterrell.com> Subject: RE: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Ron, I talked to Shawn, the City Engineer, about the subject and he agrees with how recent the subdivision was reviewed and accepted it is not responsibility to add a new light. Please disregard the comment to add the additional light for your sight plan. Thanks Ron, Karl A. Johnson From: Ron Isackson < RonIsackson@cushingterrell.com > Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 8:22 AM To: Karl A. Johnson < kajohnson@BOZEMAN.NET > Cc: Zack Graham < ZackGraham@cushingterrell.com > Subject: RE: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Karl, 2 If this is the case, your response begs the question of why this wasn’t caught previously. The mid-block crossing was approved in it’s current configuration with street lighting as part of the subdivision and infrastructure improvements. If this wasn’t required as part of the subdivision and infrastructure improvements, we do not see why it should be required as part of the site plan package. Because this was not part of the original bid package for the infrastructure improvements, it is significantly more expensive to go back for a second light pole at this point. Can you please explain how the city has the authority to require something beyond what has already been approved? Thank you, Ron Ron Isackson PE, PEng Civil Engineer 406.922.7107 | cushingterrell.com Cushing Terrell is an affiliate of CTA From: Karl A. Johnson < kajohnson@BOZEMAN.NET > Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2021 8:41 AM To: Ron Isackson < RonIsackson@cushingterrell.com > Subject: Re: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Ron, Yes a mid block cross walk requires lighting on both sides of the crossing. So we would need one shown on your side prior to site plan approval Thanks, Karl From: Ron Isackson < RonIsackson@cushingterrell.com > Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 9:09 AM To: Karl A. Johnson < kajohnson@BOZEMAN.NET > Subject: RE: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Good morning Karl, Have you had a chance to review the below email? Thanks, Ron Ron Isackson PE, PEng Civil Engineer 406.922.7107 | cushingterrell.com Cushing Terrell is an affiliate of CTA 3 From: Ron Isackson < RonIsackson@cushingterrell.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 2:34 PM To: 'Karl A. Johnson' < kajohnson@BOZEMAN.NET > Subject: FW: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary Karl, We have a question in regards to your comment on adding a street luminaire as part of Package D. The below snapshot indicates what was approved as part of the subdivision infrastructure package. There is an existing luminaire on the west side of Stafford at the mid-block crossing. Does your comment imply that there should have been another luminaire installed on the east side of the street, as part of the subdivision improvements? Thank you, Ron 4 Ron Isackson PE, PEng Civil Engineer 406.922.7107 | cushingterrell.com Cushing Terrell is an affiliate of CTA From: Susana Montana < smontana@BOZEMAN.NET > Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2021 2:04 PM To: Nicole Olmstead < NicoleOlmstead@cushingterrell.com > Subject: 20448 Cottonwood Apartments Package D--heads up summary ***this email is from an external source*** - CushingTerrell Helpdesk Greetings Nicole. The DRC discussion of Package D went well this morning. In fact, Karl Johnson already has his comments in writing—which I attach to this message to give you an early start on responses. He cautions of trees planted too close to utility services and that a public streetlight is needed in the northwest corner of the Site. Addi Jadin will provide comments and guidance on parkland cash-in-lieu for this portion of Phase 2 of the subdivision. John Alston asks that you make sure that the mechanical rooms in each building is sized properly and he provides the attached drawing to guide you. I will wait a couple of days to get all written comments in but I expect that we will determine that the current site plan will be sufficient to begin the required public comment period on February 22 nd through March 8 th . I will give you instructions within the next few days. I have to give a final review of the Landscape Block Frontage details for the Garfield-facing buildings—with your two departure requests. Good work, Nicole and your team. Susana Montana Senior Planner | Development Review, Community Development The Department of Community Development is revising its operations until further notice to address COVID-19. We appreciate your patience and are working hard to keep as much stability of operations as possible. There may be delays in responding to inquiries. We continue to receive and review development applications. Some application types may see delays in review due to suspension of public meetings. City of Bozeman | 20 East Olive St. | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771 P: 406-582-2285 | E: smontana@bozeman.net W: www.bozeman.net/planning https://bzncloud.bozeman.net New project submittal instructions can be found here: https://www.bozeman.net/government/planning/covid-19- development-review-procedures 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. 5 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.