HomeMy WebLinkAbout05_Concept Plan Review Comment Narrative_05142021MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 1 of 6
CONCEPT REVIEW COMMENT RESPONSES
N 3rd Duplexes
The following responds to the comments provided for N 3rd Duplexes, Application 21-204.
PLANNING COMMENTS
City Agency Responses to Applicant Conceptual Review Questions:
1. You do not need to subdivide the lot. However, should an owner wish to do that in the future, it is important to,
at this time, configure the two, separate buildings in such a way as to meet setback, parking and open space
requirements at this time. If the lot is split, each lot must provide the following setbacks from respective
property lines: A 15-foot front setback, a 20-ft setback to an individual garage facing the street, a 5-ft side
setback and a 20-ft rear setback. 2. The next step is to submit a Certificate of Appropriateness application with a site plan (application forms are
attached). If the COA is approved, a site plan with landscaping would be required to be submitted for a
demolition permit.
3. And 4. The sanitary sewer line would need an easement to extend to the outer building from 3rd Avenue.
Please contact Engineer Lance Lehigh for details on utility access considerations at llehigh@bozeman.net.
5. The alley ROW is narrow at 15-feet and 8 inches in width.
6. Please see the parking comments below.
7. We hope that the comments below provide you sufficient information to submit a complete and code-
compliant COA and site plan application.
Response:
1. See attachment: A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
2. See attachment: N3rd Duplexes_Site Plan & NCOA Submittal Checklist Memo_05142021 for NCOA
Application file locations 3. &4 See attachment: C1.2UtilitiesPlan_05172021; A 10’ easement has been proposed at property
frontages of N 3rd Ave & W Beall St
1. The 0.265-acre subject property (“Site”) is zoned R-4, Residential High-density District with a Community Plan Future
Land Use Map designation of “urban neighborhood”. The Site lies within the City’s Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). The Site is currently occupied by a circa-1890 single-household dwelling, a detached garage and a shed.
The house is deemed “eligible” as an historic structure pursuant to the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Section
38.070.090, Definitions and is subject to the demolition procedures of Section 38.340.020 through 130 (see Attachment
1 to this letter). The demolition of an eligible historic structure and any new development on the Site are subject to the
NCOD standards of 38.340.040—Certificate of Appropriateness (COA)
Response: See attachment: N3rd Duplexes_Historic Property Record_05142021; “Sect. 38.700 of the Bozeman
Municipal Code defines an eligible property as one that meets the criteria for inclusion in the NRHP or State Register
either 1) individually or 2) as a contributing building to an existing or potential historic district. The site has been
evaluated against the NRHP Criteria. Cursory research found no association with events that have made significant
contributions to the broad patterns of our history under Criterion A. A deed search found no association with
historically significant persons under Criterion B. The site does not represent significant characteristics of a type, period,
or method of construction under Criterion C, and is unlikely to yield important information in reference to research
questions under Criterion D. The site is not located within a historic district and the surrounding neighborhood has low district potential as residences vary widely in terms of age, style, condition, and degree of integrity retained. There is
little remaining continuity of use and setting in the vicinity due to infill and redevelopment that has occurred since
McDonald’s 1984 recording. Metcalf recommends this site is not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.”
MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 2 of 6
2. Table 38.320.030.A Form and Intensity. The proposal is demolition of the existing structures and construction of two
detached duplex buildings for a total of four dwelling units on the 0.265-acre (11,543 square foot [sf]) lot. In the R-4
zone, the minimum lot area for each duplex dwelling unit is 2,500 sf. Therefore, the 11,543 sf lot can accommodate the proposed 4 dwelling units.
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
3. Building Setbacks.
a. 38.320.020.F. This Site is a corner lot; each street frontage is deemed a “front” yard for setback purposes.
Corner lots require each street frontage to meet the 15-feet front setback.
b. 38.320.020.F. The current, single lot configuration for the two buildings does not indicate which side of the lot is
the “rear” and has the rear property line. The rear lot line requires a 20-foot setback from structures. Please
make your own determination which façade is the “rear” façade and, therefore, that side of the lot is the “rear”
for purposes of the 20-foot rear setback.
c. 38.540.010.A.6. (open air) Parking is permitted within required rear setbacks.
d. Table 38.320.030.C. Note 8. All vehicle entrances, oriented to the street, into garages shall be no closer than 20
feet to a property line, unless explicitly authorized otherwise under this chapter.
e. 38.350.070.B.1. Parking and garages for single to four-household residential uses. Surface parking may be
allowed within the front setback when located in front of a parking space that meets setback provisions of
Section 320.
f. 38.350.070.B.2. Surface parking may be allowed in the rear setback.
g. 38.360.030.I.2.b Accessory structures greater than 120 sf but less than or equal to 600 sf in footprint may not be located in any front, side or corner side setback. The accessory structure must be set back a minimum of
either (a) 6 feet, or (b) when parking is provided between the structure and the rear property line, 20-feet
except when required parking spaces need a greater setback for back-up maneuverability. The 15-ft, 8 inch
alley would require a 30-ft setback (for backing up space) with stacked parking off an alley; or a 10-ft setback
with no stacked parking.
Response: See attachment(s): A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
4. 38.540.020.K and Table 38.540.050-1 Parking. You are proposing two 2-bedroomunits and two 3-bedroom units. The
parking requirement for each 2-bedroom dwelling units is 2 spaces and the requirement for each 3-bedroom unit is 3
spaces. The total parking requirement for all 4 units would be 10 spaces.
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021; The bedroom count for
each proposed unit has been reduced to 2-bedrooms. Therefore, 8 total parking spaces are required for the 4 proposed
units. 8 off-street parking spaces have been provided, with an additional 2 on-street spaces along W Beall St.
5. 38.540.050.A.1.a (1) On Street Parking. You seek to satisfy part of the residential parking requirement with on-street
parking meeting the standards of this subsection. Please note that Engineering requires that such on-street parallel
parking does not encroach upon any sight vision triangle for driveways or street or alley intersections [38.400.100].
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021; 2 on-street parking spaces
have been provided along W Beall St.
6. 38.360.030.I.2 Accessory Garage Setbacks and 38.540.020.D and K Backing Out of On-Site Parking. One of the duplex
buildings is proposed to have attached garages accessed from N. 3rd Avenue. Another one would have an attached
garage and a detached garage (accessory structure) accessed from the alley. The alley is narrow, at 15-feet, 8-inches
wide. This garage must be set back 30-feet from the alley-facing property line to provide sufficient stacking and back up
space. Please insure that any “stacked” vehicle parking does not encroach upon required setbacks or property lines.
Response: See attachment: A1.00_Site Plan_05142021; Per the attached site plan, proposed parking layout meets
setback requirements at N 3rd Ave & Alley locations.
MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 3 of 6
7. 38.310.030.A Permitted Uses in the R-4 District and 38.340. The two duplex buildings are a principal permitted use in
the R-4 District, provided the design meets (1) the standards of 38.360.210; (2) the criteria for a Certificate of
Appropriateness (COA) for the demolition of the existing historic structure(s); (3) the new building design meets the guidelines and standards established by and noted within the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (see Attachment 2); (4) and the COA is granted by the Director. Note that
the COA application would be reviewed by the City’s Design Review Board (DRB) which is a public hearing process. The
DRB, COA and site plan review require public notice. The site plan would be submitted with the COA application. It is
noted that this Site lies within the area of concern of the North East Neighborhood Association which usually comments
on proposals within their area of concern. The City posts notice of development applications on our GIS map—see public
information portal. http://www.bozeman.net/government/planning/using-the-planning-map
Response: See attachment: N3rd Duplexes_Site Plan & NCOA Submittal Checklist Memo_05142021 for NCOA
application file location and other relevant file locations.
8. 38.320.020.C Maximum lot coverage. Please note that lot coverage percentage includes all impervious surfaces
including buildings, sidewalks, driveways, patios, pavers, and the like. Please note the percent lot coverage for the
entire lot, not the separate buildings.
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021; See “Additional Inquiries”
below for revised information regarding lot coverage calculation.
9. 38.510. Block Frontage. Please note that both N. 3rd Avenue and W. Beall Street are designated Landscape Block Frontages. The building setbacks from the street, entrances facing the street, windows facing the street, weather
protection over entrance doors, and the provision of a sidewalk from the public frontage sidewalk to the front door must
meet these standards and those for “1 to 4 household dwellings” in Section 38.360.210.
Response: See attachment: A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
10. 38.420 Parkland. Residential uses must provide their fair share of public parkland in addition to any on-site private open
space. The public park requirement is 0.03-acres of land per dwelling unit. The four dwellings of this Site would trigger
a requirement for 0.12-acres or 5,227 sf of park land. A cash-in-lieu of providing land is available if requested to and
approved by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department and its advisory board. The advisor board consideration is a
public meeting which requires scheduling and public notice. Please contact Parks Planner Ms. Addi Jadin at
ajadin@bozeman.net when you submit a site plan for review.
Response: See attachment: N3rd Duplexes_Cash-In-Lieu Parkland Correspondence_05142021
11. 38.520.060 Residential Private On Site Open Space This standard requires 150 sf of private or common on site open
space per 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom dwelling or 600 sf for the 4 dwelling units. Up to 50% of this open space may be
provided as private balconies. Please provide a calculation box on the site plan or landscape plan showing how this
requirement will be met.
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
12. 38.550.040 Landscape plan. Several mature trees would be removed for this development. There is a detached sidewalk
along both street frontages and a boulevard landscape strip. Please provide street trees and on-site landscaping
meeting the standards of 38.550.050.E, G, H, I J and K.
Response: See attachment: L1.0_SITE MATERIALS AND PLANITNG PLAN_05-12-2021
MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 4 of 6
ADDITIONAL INQUIRIES
1. Inquiry regarding Lot Coverage; On past projects, we have not included sidewalks, driveways, etc in that calculation (I can think of a few past projects that would have not met that requirement if we included sidewalks, driveways, etc).
The definition, per below doesn’t include those, it even allows canopies to be excluded. Can you let me know if there is
a different definition we should reference.
UDO Definition:
Lot coverage. The ratio of horizontal area, measured from the exterior surface of the exterior walls of the ground floor,
of all principal and accessory buildings on a lot to the total lot area. For the purposes of calculating lot coverage, those
portions of a structure which do not have exterior walls are not included, even if it is covered by a roof.
Response: You are correct. Lot coverage includes only building footprint square footage. I stand corrected. Thank you.
Response: See attachment(s): G0.00_Cover Sheet_05142021; 2_A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
2. Inquiry regarding Setbacks; this is an important one as it dictates if we can fit a garage to the north of Unit 1A, and
follow current development patterns. As a single lot, per your notes we still layout for hypothetical setbacks in the
event it gets split into two in the future. So, for units 1A & 1B, 1A faces 3rd, 1B faces Beall. Our interpretation is that the
setbacks follow the development pattern of the neighborhood and orientation of the unit. That effectively creates a 5’
sideyard to the north of Unit 1a (because it faces west) and 5’ sideyard to the east of 1b (it faces south). Units 2A & 2b both face south, so we have identified the functional rear yard to the north, with a 20’ setback. This seems to meet the
intent of setbacks.
If we run a 20’ setback along the entire North property line, that creates a pattern exception – Unit 1A, would have a
20’ setback along its ‘functional’ side yard. I ran a couple examples (see attached). There is a chance engineering will require the sewer easement along the north, making this conversation mute, but I do want to understand it for the sake
of our options. As currently drawn, my opinion is that it matches the development patterns along N3rd.
Response: At our staff meeting this morning we reviewed your Options A and B. We could not find that Option A,
with the attached garages or Units A-1 and 2, could meet the 20-feet rear yard requirement. Option B, without the attached garages for Units A, would meet the 20-feet rear yard requirement. Note that the Unit B detached garage
must be situated 6-feet from the north property line per 38.360.030.I.2. There must be 5-feet setbacks for each
building between them. Option B seems to meet those standards. Thank you.
Response: See attachment: A1.00_Site Plan_05142021
3. Inquiry regarding Historic; The house was identified 37 years ago as ‘eligible’ within a ‘potential’ historic district, but
not updated with the more recent survey. Given the lack of eligible structures in the vicinity, plus the updated zoning
and land use, it is a very high probability that area will never qualify as a historic district. Regardless it is still listed as eligible and unfortunately not been updated to reflect the deterioration of the structure. Your explanation is pretty
clear for the steps required to propose demo of an ‘eligible structure’ but it would be good to know of recent precedent
that informs how planning has viewed those proposals. I can make the optimistic-architect argument on why it doesn’t
make sense to preserve, allowing for increased density that is more in line with current land use goals. But, I’d love a
counter argument on what obstacles we may face so we can set expectations accordingly.
Response: The City’s Municipal Code Section 38.700.090 defines what is an historic structure or site.
Sec. 38.700.090. - H definitions. “Historic site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or
activity where the location itself possesses significant historic, cultural or archaeological value. The value of a site must
be based on the ability of the site to meet the eligibility requirements for historical significance as described by the
National Register of Historic Places and as approved by the city. The most recent National Register Criteria for
Evaluation as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service are the basis for determining
MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 5 of 6
whether a property is eligible for historical significance when a new or updated evaluation is prepared. Historic
structure. Any building or structure that is:
1. listed in the State or National Register of Historic Places;
2. designated as a historic property under local or state designation law or survey;
3. certified as a contributing resource within a National Register listed or locally designated historic district; or
4. eligible, as determined by the City of Bozeman, to be listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places either
individually or as a contributing building to an existing or potential historic district.
The most recent National Register Criteria for Evaluation as published by the U.S. Department of the Interior,
National Park Service are the basis for determining whether a property is eligible for historical significance when a
new or updated evaluation is prepared.”
As you are aware, the City’s 1984 historic survey of this property determined that the structure was a contributing
structure to a potential historic district of the area. It states: As you are aware, the City’s 1984 historic survey of
this property determined that the structure was a contributing structure to a potential historic district of
the area. It states:
“This structure qualifies as a contributing element within a potential historic district due to its association with the
residential aspect of the Civic Phase of Bozeman’s historic/architectural development. The historic integrity of this
property has been retained due to the survival of original design and materials and continuity of use, setting and
location.”
As you propose to demolish the structures on this property, you will need to meet the Certificate of Appropriate
(COA) standards of BMC 38.340.040 through 130.
As part of your application for the COA, you may present your rationale or justification that the structure is not subject to 38.340.080, Demolition of Historic Structures, as it is not “historic”. Your justification will be reviewed by
the Director as he is the “reviewing authority” that will make a final decision on the demolition application.
Should the structure be deemed historic, Section 38.220.090.j describes the process for a cost analysis of repair or
rehabilitation of an historic structure that must be provided with the COA application for demolition. Most
applicants hire an Architectural Historian specialist to prepare the evaluation. Per the Director’s determination,
when considering what costs are included in the determination of whether there is “no viable economic life
remaining”, the costs for utility connections, design, permitting fees which would be applicable to both new and
rehabilitation/repair of an existing building are not included. Cost of finishes and fixtures beyond those necessary
for minimum building code compliance are also excluded.
Response: See attachment(s): N3rd Duplexes_Site Plan & NCOA Submittal Checklist Memo_05142021 for NCOA
application file location; N3rd Duplexes_Historic Property Record_05142021
ENGINEERING COMMENTS
Easements:
1. BMC 38.410.060 (B.2) Easements - The applicant must provide a ten foot utility easement (power, gas, communication,
etc.) along the developments property frontage prior to Site Plan approval. The applicant may contact the Engineering
Department to receive a copy of a utility easement template.
Response: See attachment: C1.2UtilitiesPlan_05172021; A 10’ easement has been proposed at property frontages of N 3rd
Ave & W Beall St
MINARIK ARCHITECTURE Inc. 618 N Wallace | Bozeman, MT 59715 MINARIKARCH.COM 406 579 5597
N 3rd Duplexes 5.14.2021 6 of 6
Water Rights:
1. Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.410.130 - The applicant must contact Brian Heaston with the City Engineering
Department to obtain a determination of cash-in-lieu of water rights (CILWR). CILWR must be paid prior to site plan approval.
Response: Form to be requested from Brian Heaston at a later date.
Stormwater:
1. DSSP Section (A) (4) Water Quality - The applicant must include a drainage plan prior to site plan approval with post-
construction storm water management controls that are designed to infiltrate, evapotranspire, and/or capture for reuse the
post-construction runoff generated from the first 0.5 inches of rainfall from a 24-hour storm preceded by 48 hours of no
measurable precipitation. For projects that cannot meet 100% of the runoff reduction requirement, the remainder of the
runoff from the first 0.5 inches of rainfall must be either: a. Treated onsite using post-construction storm water management
control(s) expected to remove 80 percent total suspended solids (TSS); b. Managed offsite within the same sub-watershed
using post-construction storm water management control(s) that are designed to infiltrate, evapotranspire, and/or capture
for reuse; or c. Treated offsite within the same subwatershed using post construction storm water management control(s)
expected to remove 80 percent TSS.
2. DSSP Section (C) Water Quantity - The applicant must provide on-site detention prior to site plan approval with release
rates limited to predevelopment runoff rates. Retention ponds must be sized based on a 10-year, 2-hour storm intensity.
3. The seasonal high groundwater elevation must be determined and the engineer responsible for the design drainage must certify that the proposed infrastructure can meet or exceed the City’s drainage requirements during the seasonal high prior
to site plan approval.
Response: See attachment(s): 2.0_Stormwater Report_04282021; 2.1_Stormwater Calculations Retention_04282021;
C1.3Grading&Drainage_05172021
Water:
1. Provide location and size of the proposed water service line(s).
2. DSSP V.A.6.h – Existing water service lines are not utilized (if applicable) must be abandoned at the water main.
3. DSSP V.A.6 – Service lines shall serve only a single building.
Response: See attachment: C1.2UtilitiesPlan_05172021
Wastewater:
1. Provide location and size of sewer service line(s).
2. DSSP (V.B.11) Sanitary sewer services - The minimum diameter of a service is 4-inch. Services shall connect to the main
with in-line gasketed wyes. The service line stub, from the main to the property line or easement line, shall be installed with a
maximum slope of 1/2-inch per foot. The minimum slope of a 4-inch service line stub is 1/4-inch per foot. The minimum slope of a 6-inch service line stub is 1/8-inch per foot. Sewer service line stubs will typically be installed 15-feet from the
downstream lot line. Services are to be installed perpendicular to the main. Each building shall have a separate service line
from the building to the sewer main.
Response: See attachment: C1.2UtilitiesPlan_05172021