Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout30_RC2Comments&Responses_10182021 Page 1 of 2 Comments Provided: August 16, 2021 Responses: October 18, 2021 Attn: Susana Montana Senior Planner 20 East Olive Street Bozeman, MT 59715 We have received comments to our Site Plan Revisions and Corrections #2 and the below are our responses in red with the original comments: 1. For Adequacy Determination--BMC 38.540.050. Parking. Please correct all Sheets, tables and narratives with the correct parking numbers as discussed below. (A) Parking Counts (1) Residential Parking. Sheet A.001 has revised parking space counts as does the Project Matrix sheet (sheet not numbered). Sheets A.003 and A.004 show the parking levels with the spaces shown. The project narrative indicates that the basement garage is for residents use only. The Level B1 basement floor plan (Sheet A.003) shows 50 parking spaces, of which 12 are compact sized, representing a permitted 24% of the residents’ on-site parking spaces [38.540.020.Note 1]. The basement level is described as the residents’ parking along with 6 on-street spaces. Please clarify where the remaining 36 residents’ spaces are located. Please number the parking spaces on the floor plan and label all of the compact spaces because it is unclear which lines are indicating parking spaces with the proper widths. (2) Non-residential parking. Sheet A.004 shows the Level 1 floor plan and parking garage. The Level 1 parking garage is for commercial use only. I count (perhaps) 38 parking spaces, of which 15 are compact size representing 39% of the commercial/public spaces exceeding the maximum 25%. The Project Matrix sheets indicates that there are 47 standard size parking spaces, 24 compact spaces, 2 ADA spaces within the Level 1 parking garage, and 21 valet parking spaces for a total of 94 non-residential spaces. Where are all the remaining non-residential spaces? Where will the AC Hotel valet spaces be parked? Please number the spaces in the Level 1 garage as some spaces not labeled “compact” appear to be too narrow. Response: The narrative provided with RC#3 states the public parking is accessible off Villard, which is the basement parking for the AC Hotel. The drawings also indicate this, and we have numbered all parking spaces for coherence. Page 2 of 2 Sheets A.004 and A.005 show parking for the Residential(Levels 1 and 2) parking. Residential parking is accessed off the alley and continues up to level 2. As noted, there are 92 spaces (88 required residential spaces and 4 required retail spaces, see Parking Narrative). Sheets A.003 and A.004 show the spaces for the Commercial(Basement) parking. Commercial parking is accessed off Villard Ave and continues down to the basement. As noted there are 81 spaces (1 car share space and 80 for the AC Hotel, see Parking Narrative). In total, the project has 41 compact spaces out of 173 total spaces, representing 23.7%. 2. Please label clearly on the Landscape Plan Sheet L.000 the building setbacks along each building frontage This is not a requirement per the Site Plan Checklist but is provided, see L.000. Building setbacks are also shown on Civil and Architectural Site Plans. 3. On Landscape Plan Sheet L.300, please label the number of each species planted and label the Drought-tolerant (DT) species next to the species name. Note that we take the landscape plan on the final inspection and verify the species, the number and the location of these plantings as well as the caliper size of the trees. This is indicated in the ‘Plant Schedule on sheet L000 and is repeated on L300 per request. 4. Please provide a detail of the screening of the utility panels along the alley frontage per 38.520.070.D.1 Screening at the alley is not required per 38.520.070.B.1 and confirmed in correspondence with Susana Montana on 6/9/2021, see exhibit #24_SPRClarificationCorrespondence_06152021. The Ives is providing limited screening along Villard Ave, and details were included in RC#1 submission, see details 8 & 9 on A.020. 5. When the plans have been revised to respond to these and other DRC comments, we will need a “clean” copy without the correction bubbles for the staff report and final site plan file. Thank you. Acknowledged, we are happy to provide once our revisions are accepted. MEMORANDUM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ TO: Susana Montana, Planner III FROM: Karl Johnson, Engineer I RE: APPLICATION NO 21004 - North Central Block 4 Site Plan Review R02 DATE: September 08, 2021 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ENGINEERING COMMENTS: Easements 1. BMC 38.410.060 Easements - Front setback utility easements must be ten feet wide, and must always be provided unless written confirmation is submitted to the community development department from all utility companies providing service indicating that front setback easements are not needed. Letters of confirmation from the utility companies are provided stating that the utility easements proposed are adequate. Drafts of the utility easement and access easement are provided for the City’s review. Upon City approval of the draft easements, signed easements will be provided. See Document: 36_UtilityEasementApprovalLetters_10182021 Water Rights 1. BMC 38.410.130 (A) (1) Water rights - CILWR must be paid prior to site plan approval. Acknowledged. Transportation 1. BMC 38.400.090 Access - The access spacing deviation request does not provide adequate information or analysis of the proposed conditions to allow for approval. The applicant is requested to provide additional information in the following areas: The additional information requested below is provided in a separate memo from Marvin and Associates included in this RC3 submission. See Document: 32_ParkingGarageAccessDepartureRequestLetter_10182021 a. Traffic Volumes. There is no mention of the impact from the increased alley traffic due to the garage access in the alley. b. Turning movements. The applicant should address potential left turn conflicts from the alley to the north of Villard with left turns from the garage access. c. Traffic controls. What impact will queueing at the stop sign on Willson have on access to/from the garage? d. The TIS for the master site plan evaluates the LOS at the garage entrance, however it does not provide any safety analysis. It in fact identifies 155 feet as the stopping sight distance and indicates that the “design of parking on the south side of Villard should provide adequate site distance for vehicles exiting the garage accesses based on a minimum safe stopping site distance.” Confirm the parking on the south side of Villard will provide adequate site distance as proposed. e. Location and alignment. The request does not discuss the alley access on the north side of Villard and the potential impacts of the new access location. There is also an existing driveway on the north side of Villard that aligns with the current access location that needs to be addressed. It should be noted that unlike the proposed access location, the existing access location would not require a deviation. ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMENTS: Lighting 1. DSSP Plans and Specification Review Policy – Plans, specifications, and submittals for public infrastructure improvements (street lighting, alley reconstruction, Roadway improvements, fire hydrant, and stormwater main) must be submitted to the City Engineering Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for infrastructure review. 2. DSSP Fire Service Line Standard – Plans for all fire service lines must be submitted to the City Engineering Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for review. 3. BMC 38.400.070 - Street Lighting : The required public street light(s) must be included in a Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD), in accordance with the City of Bozeman Lighting and Electrical Specifications, prior to occupancy. Acknowledged. The infrastructure plans and specifications were submitted to the City on September 7 th , 2021.