Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout(29b) Response to 18574 - Engineering Comments - 05-14-2021 MEMORANDUM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Sarah Rosenberg, Planner II FROM: Anna Russell, Engineer II RE: Bridger Meadows Pre-app Revision 2 Application No. 18574 DATE: March 2, 2020 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Engineering Comments: Watercourse connectivity is a major issue with this application. If the wetland is connected, which is appears to be, the City is not in support of filling in the 50 foot watercourse setback area for development of this project. In addition, the City is not in support of filling in floodplains for development. We advise the applicant to remove lots in the floodplain and infrastructure in the floodplain. This advisement takes into account the impacts to life and property of residents and the natural habitat when development is located within a special flood hazard area. Extreme efforts have been made to address disturbance of existing wetlands and the East Gallatin River floodplain. To address comments on the preapplication plan that were primarily related to wetlands and floodplain impacts, the project was completely redesigned in accordance with suggestions by the reviewers and our wetlands consultant, Lynn Bacon. The result is the elimination of ten (11) (10) out of 27 residential lots, a 925% reduction in federally protected wetlands impacts (from 0.74 acres to 0.08 acres) and a 454% reduction in floodplain area impacts (from 1.86 acres to 0.41 acres). The 100 year floodway is unaffected by the currently proposed project. The proposed development includes “no build” easements on residential Lots 9 through 12 to protect, in perpetuity, existing federally protected wetlands that encroach onto these lots. The proposed plan and easement language will not allow any disturbance to these wetlands. The proposed floodplain fill is localized to Lots 3 through 6. The amount of 100 year flood storage volume lost due to fill placement is more than offset by excavation proposed within the floodplain fringe, west of Lot 6. The excavation area is an historic artificial fill from an old road or railroad bed that is taking up space within the existing floodplain; this fill was placed prior to the current FEMA floodplain mapping and report. This project proposes to restore elevations to resemble the elevations prior to fill placement. Due to the net increase in flood storage volume, there will be no net rise in floodplain water surface elevations due to the project. Proposed site grading will bring all building sites up to an elevation several feet above the 100-year flood elevation, ensuring there will be no adverse impacts to life and property See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. The plat layout presented on sheet 2 of the Preapp Plan currently does not conform to the City’s development code regulations. Items of non-conformance are identified and summarized below, but may not be entirely exhaustive. Any items remaining non-conforming with the Preliminary Plat application must be granted a relaxation through the Preliminary PUD application. It is the applicant’s responsibility to specifically identify all relaxations to code requirements. There is no guarantee that relaxations will be granted by the approval authority or supported by engineering staff. The applicant is encouraged to follow the general direction given in Planning Director Matsen’s letter to the applicant dated May 3, 2019 as well as direction offered below. Transportation 1. BMC 18.02.010 International Fire Code - City standards require a 96 foot diameter fire truck turnaround at the end of the proposed Shady Glen Lane to meet the current International fire code. The Shady Glen Lane cul-de-sac has been enlarged to comply with fire truck turn around standard of 96’ diameter. 2. Engineering requires a primary street connection through the Commercial Drive cul-de-sac, which must be designed as a full local street per City of Bozeman standards. A 60 foot public street must be dedicated on the Bridger Meadows property for this street connection. No gate will be allowed across the local street. Public access is provided via The Links Condominiums via a proposed extension of their existing access drive. The proposed extension is in accordance with the easement included in (49) Links access easement – Appendix D Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. The project proposes to provide an emergency access to Commercial Drive that will be paved, gated and locked at the property line. It cannot be used for public access due to physical constraint, and code deficiencies of the alignment and connection of the proposed intersection with Bridger Center Drive, due in large part to the fact that in 2005, the City of Bozeman vacated the portion of Bridger Center’s access easement at Commercial Drive that provided for the opportunity to extend Bridger Center Drive north to Bridger Meadows. In August of 2018, Bridger Center was in front of the City Commission for an appeal of an administrative ruling in which the DRC did not require Golf Course Partners developer of the LINKs development to provide access to Bridger Center’s undeveloped land as required by the following Municipal Code: Sec. 38.400.010. - Streets, general. Relation to undeveloped areas. “When a proposed development adjoins undeveloped land, and access to the undeveloped land would reasonably pass through the new development, streets and alleys within the proposed development must be arranged to allow the suitable development of the adjoining undeveloped land. Streets and alleys within the proposed development must be constructed to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed, unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions.” At an earlier stage in this process, when the City was interested in annexing this County Island, we had been approached by the City Manager and assured by City Engineers and a City Fire Department Director that we could develop Bridger Meadows with the single access. At the encouragement of the City Commission and the City Legal Department, Bridger Center and Golf Course Partners (the developer and majority owner of The Links) began negotiations, mainly to avoid the costs and lengthy delays a lawsuit with the City would have entailed for all parties. One item of considerable concern of Golf Course Partners, and the Links residents was the unwelcome potential of additional residential cut/through and Commercial traffic from Commercial Center (M-1 Zoning) passing through the Links. At this point in the negotiations with Golf Course Partners, Bridger Meadows approached the City Staff and was assured that full access through the Links and an emergency access would be sufficient to develop the property and that a through access to Commercial was not a big concern of theirs. Based on these assurances, Bridger Center and Golf Course Partners amicably finalized a public access easement through the Links, and Bridger Meadows withdrew their administrative appeal. This easement provided Bridger Meadows the second access required by code to develop in the City of Bozeman. In our next three submittals, City Engineering again and again required a full access to Commercial. Several of the City Commissioners are quite familiar with the history of this project and the lengths we have gone over the last eight years to obtain an access; it is for this reason that we are requesting the City Commission, as part of this PUD review process, to approve our second access as an emergency access. See (07) Bridger Meadows Proposed Relaxations and Waivers 20-0925 - Documents Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. Wetlands and Floodplains 1. BMC 38.600.240 Floodway- Prohibited Uses - Adding fill in the floodway for the proposed tennis court is prohibited if it presents an obstruction of the natural flow of waters or increase in flood levels during the 100-year flood. a. The applicant must provide a no-rise certification for any encroachment proposed within the designated floodway. The no-rise must be prepared and certified by a qualified professional engineer and be provided with the preliminary PUD and preliminary plat applications. With the new layout there is no encroachment of the floodway. b. With the preliminary plat, the applicant must show the tennis court causes ‘no-rise’ in the base flood elevation. As presented, the proposed tennis court (Lot 5) location is located within an existing designated FEMA floodway, which is generally discouraged due to the potential flood hazard. The applicant is advised that a watercourse setback relaxation must be requested and approved by the approval authority with the PUD application to allow the tennis court along with a ‘no-rise’ analysis. With the new layout there is no encroachment of the floodway. 2. BMC 38.410.100.A Watercourse Setback – Include the zone 1 and zone 2 watercourse setback boundaries on an exhibit with the overall subdivision lots. Only those encroachments into Zone 2 of the setback allowed in BMC 38.410.100.A.2.e may occur. The watercourse setback must otherwise be kept free of encroachment of improvements, including the placement of fill, unless a relaxation is granted by the approval authority through the PUD application. As submitted, a relaxation to the watercourse setback is currently not supported by Engineering. All encroachments are in Zone 2. A relaxation is requested through the PUD process to reduce the 50-foot wetland buffer width. Wetland impacts have been greatly reduced in the current site plan. See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. 3. BMC Section 38.410.100A.2.d Watercourse Setback – As presented, fill for lots and Shady Glen Lane is located in the delineated floodplain and the watercourse setback. The applicant requested a relaxation to the setback requirements with this Preapplication submittal. As submitted, Engineering does not currently support filling in the watercourse setback to create buildable lots. Engineering encourages the applicant to reduce the intensity of encroachment of lot fill into the setback by eliminating lots on the westerly side of the lane. In order to address comments on the preapplication plan that are primarily related to wetlands and floodplain impacts, the project was completely redesigned resulting in elimination of 10 11residential lots and a 925% reduction in wetlands impacts (from 0.74 acres to 0.080 acres). To meet the City’s stated goals with respect to Planned Unit Developments and promoting infill housing, a further reduction in lots would be counterproductive. The wetlands delineation report and 404 permit application are attached to this submittal (13a-b) Wetlands Review TQ City Submittal Bridger Center revised – 09-25-2020 - City Submittal and Appendix A). It is proposed to revise the watercourse setback following approval of, and construction in accordance with, the FEMA (CLOMR) and 404 permits. Rather than increasing wetlands impacts to account for a 50 foot buffer, it is also proposed to reduce the buffer width to protect the wetlands on these lots. (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 identifies the proposed watercourse setback and buffer width. The project as currently proposed provides a good balance meeting many of the City’s goals for infill development as stated in the UDC and the growth policy, while also protecting existing wetlands to the extent feasible. The Wetland Review TQ City Submittal document, (13a-b) Wetlands Review TQ City Submittal Bridger Center revised 09-25-2020 - City Submittal and Appendix A), has been provided by our wetlands specialist in support of this relaxation. 4. BMC Section 38.410.100A.2.e.(3) Watercourse Setback – The applicant requested a relaxation to the watercourse setback requirements to construct a new roadway with this Preapplication submittal. As submitted, Engineering does not currently support filling in the watercourse setback to create a sidewalk, boulevard and a parking lane. Engineering encourages the proposed street section for Shady Glen Lane be narrowed by removing the sidewalk, boulevard, and parking from the westerly side to minimize the area of encroachment into the watercourse setback. The Applicant is requesting relaxations to right of way width and construction standards on the northeast side of Shady Glen Lane where it parallels an existing pedestrian trail. The relaxations are needed to eliminate impacts to existing wetlands west of the street while allowing adequate space for the street, pedestrian access, and the residential lots. The requested relaxations affect only the areas between the curb and right of way; the street itself will meet all City standards for a local street including curb to curb width, slopes and horizontal alignment. The relaxations are requested for Shady Glen Lane from approximately Station 12+00 to 20+00. They provide all the required services within a 50’ right of way. Each relaxation is described below. • Provide an attached 5’ sidewalk on the southwest side of Shady Glen Lane, in lieu of the standard detached sidewalk and boulevard. Shady Glen Lane is proposed as an extension of the existing access drive through The Links Condominiums, which also has an attached 5’ sidewalk on the south side. There are no residential lots on the northeast side of Shady Glen Lane in this area. Snow will be removed and stored on the northeast side of the street, in a 7’ wide landscaped area extending from the curb to the property line. The street will be privately maintained. To take the place of boulevard trees adjacent to residential lots, the Development Guidelines will require trees to be planted on each lot near the right of way line. • Eliminate the sidewalk on the northeast side of Shady Glen Lane. This is proposed for two reasons: in this area there are no lots fronting the northeast side of Shady Glen Lane; and an existing, established pedestrian trail parallel to and less than 10 feet away from Shady Glen Lane can accommodate pedestrian traffic along this side of the street. The 7’ wide landscaped area between the back of curb and the property line will be used for snow storage, so snow will not be pushed onto the southwest side sidewalk. • Reduce Shady Glen Lane right of way width from 60 feet to 50 feet. The reduction in right of way width is appropriate in combination with the above requested relaxations: with an attached sidewalk on one side and no sidewalk on the other side, 50 feet is adequate to meet the underlying reasons for a 60 foot right of way as a City standard. In addition, there is no possibility of increased traffic on this street, so no possible need for widening it. The street itself meets City standards and has not been reduced in size. 5. The applicant must submit an approved Conditional Letter of Map Revision based on Fill (CLOMR-F) from FEMA with the preliminary plat and preliminary PUD applications for any fill proposed in the mapped floodplain boundary as shown on FEMA FIRMs for the area. In accordance with UDC 38.220.020.A we will submit the CLOMR-F following this application, and submit the final, approved LOMR-F as a condition of Final Plat approval. Placing fill within the floodplain fringe for this project will require a floodplain permit from the City of Bozeman. Prior to applying for and obtaining a City floodplain permit, approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision for Fill Placement (CLOMR-F) will be required. The Applicant is requesting that the Commission allow the CLOMR-F to be provided along with the floodplain permit, prior to construction. Obtaining FEMA approval for this particular project, which would place a minor amount of fill on the edge of the floodplain fringe and outside of the floodway, is basically an administrative function that we propose to provide in concert with the floodplain permitting process rather than ahead of it. It is understood that the Applicant cannot place any fill until the CLOMR-F and City floodplain permit are both approved, and that a follow-up LOMR-F submittal to FEMA is also required to document that as-built conditions match the proposed design in the CLOMR-F for Final Plat approval. 6. The preliminary plat or preliminary PUD application must include a floodplain section containing separate exhibits that show the following along with the proposed lot and street layout: a) Sec. 38.600.100 – The boundaries of the designated floodway and delineated floodplain determined where the base flood elevation intersects natural ground. See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. See (53) EX-9 (FEMA map)10-20-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary Plat Application. b) Sec. 38.600.030 – The 100-year floodplain and floodway boundary as shown on the official FEMA FIRMs for the area, 30031C0808D and 30031C0809D. Contact the City of Bozeman Floodplain Administrator for official shapefiles. Noted. c) See (53) EX-9 (FEMA map)10-20-2020, FEMA Floodplain Map, Panels 808 and 809. If floodplain fill is proposed within either the mapped floodplain/floodway or the delineated floodplain, provide a proposed grading and drainage plan showing the location of the proposed fill and then show the proposed floodplain boundary delineated where the BFE meets the proposed finished grade. See (34) Site Grading Plan 09-21-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. d) If floodplain fill is proposed, provide a proposed building schematic section indicating how the Sec. 38.600.260 BMC will be satisfied. The building schematic section must be approved prior to final PUD plan and/or or final plat approval and be included in the subdivision covenants. The project does not include any buildings. e) The Lowest floor elevation (including basement or crawl space) shall be denoted on each proposed lot. For lots located in the existing delineated or mapped floodplain the lowest floor elevation must be 2’ higher than the base flood elevation pursuant to Sec. 38.600.260 BMC. The individual lot owners will be responsible for pulling permits for the construction of the home within the development. As part of their design and construction as well as permitting process they will be required to comply with section 38.600.260. 7. BMC Section 38.410.100.A.2.c(4)(a) Watercourse Setback – The watercourse setback for the East Gallatin River must extend to the edge of the delineated 100-yr floodplain. See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. 8. BMC Section 38.410.100.A.2.c.(4).(d) Watercourse Setback - As presented, the wetlands appear to have direct connectivity to the East Gallatin River. If connectivity exists, the watercourse setback must be extended an additional 50 feet. Wetland connectivity is indicated by the 50-foot buffer included in the existing watercourse setback for connected wetlands, as shown on Exhibit 7. 9. The applicant must provide an exhibit depicting the location of the existing watercourse setback on the property inclusive of required floodplain and wetland components of the setback. See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application Environmental 10. A Phase 1 Environmental Assessment is required on the existing pond with the Preliminary Plat application submittal. The City believes that past use of the property was industrial in nature and want to ensure that no contaminants or pollutants remain. A Phase 2 Environmental Assessment may be warranted depending on what the Phase 1 report returns. See (36) EX-7 (Watercourse Zones) 09-30-2020 – Drawings Folder Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. See (14) Phase I Environmental Site Assessment 03-2019 – Appendix D Preliminary PUD Application and Preliminary Plat Application. Advisory Comments: 11. BMC Section 38.600.080 Compliance with Regulations – The applicant is advised that no structure or land use may be located, extended, converted, or structurally altered without full compliance with the provisions of this chapter (38 – Unified Development Code), these specific regulations (Floodplain Regulations) and other applicable regulations (governing federal and state regulations concerning floodplain development). Noted. 12. BMC Section 38.600.090.A Flood Hazard Evaluation – The applicant is advised that the City Floodplain Administrator interprets this provision to mean that newly created fee lots created for the purpose of future building development shall not be located within the 100-yr floodplain at the time of their creation. Noted. 13. The Stormwater Division encourages the Engineer to review the Montana Post-Construction Storm Water BMP Design Guidance Manual (Manual) available at www.bozeman.net/stormwater. The Manual provides detailed information regarding innovative, space saving, and aesthetically pleasing industry standard practices capable of meeting the City’s stormwater runoff and treatment requirements, including bioretention, permeable pavement/pavers, extended detention, and infiltration basins. Please contact the City’s Stormwater Division at (406)582-2270 or kmehrens@bozeman.net with questions. Noted. 14. NFIP Procedural Items: i) Should a PUD relaxation be granted by the approval authority to place fill within the watercourse setback, the applicant is advised that prior to preliminary plat or preliminary PUD approval, it will be required to obtain approval of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (CLOMR-F) from FEMA. The CLOMR-F will be a condition of approval for obtaining a City of Bozeman Floodplain Permit for the project. In accordance with UDC 38.220.020.A we will submit the CLOMR-F following this application, and submit the final, approved LOMR-F as a condition of Final Plat approval. Placing fill within the floodplain fringe for this project will require a floodplain permit from the City of Bozeman. Prior to applying for and obtaining a City floodplain permit, approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of a Conditional Letter of Map Revision for Fill Placement (CLOMR-F) will be required. The Applicant is requesting that the Commission allow the CLOMR-F to be provided along with the floodplain permit, prior to construction. Obtaining FEMA approval for this particular project, which would place a minor amount of fill on the edge of the floodplain fringe and outside of the floodway, is basically an administrative function that we propose to provide in concert with the floodplain permitting process rather than ahead of it. It is understood that the Applicant cannot place any fill until the CLOMR-F and City floodplain permit are both approved, and that a follow-up LOMR-F submittal to FEMA is also required to document that as-built conditions match the proposed design in the CLOMR-F for Final Plat approval. ii) Should a CLOMR-F be approved by FEMA, the applicant shall as part of its required subdivision improvements place fill in conformance with the approved CLOMR-F. Noted. iii) Prior to final plat or final PUD approval, a Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR- F) shall be approved by FEMA. The location of the floodplain boundary as approved by FEMA in the LOMR-F shall be depicted upon the final plat and final PUD plan. Noted.