HomeMy WebLinkAbout005_21389 Bronken Warehouse SP DRC - RESPONSES
MEMORANDUM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM: NAKEISHA LYON, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
RE: BRONKEN WAREHOUSE SITE PLAN
APPLICATION 21389
DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Description: A Site Plan for a one-story 68,615 square foot (sf) beer and wine distribution facility located
on two lots in the Nelson Meadows Subdivision with associated accessory uses and infrastructure improvements
pertaining to shipping and receiving area, loading docks, access gates and security fencing, parking, stormwater,
and landscaping.
Project Location: Property is located on 5.15 acres within Lots 5 & 6, Block 3 of the Nelson Meadows Subdivision
legally described as SE ¼ S22, & NE ¼ S27, T01 S, R05 E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana,
according to the official plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Clerk and Recorder of Gallatin
County, Montana. Property location is subject to change due to an applicable subdivision exemption process
under review.
Recommendation: The Development Review Committee has found that the application does not comply with
the requirements of Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) and is deeming the application
inadequate for further review. Code corrections must be satisfied prior to continued review. All references are
to the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC).
Section 2 – Recommended Conditions of Approval
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this report. The
following conditions are specific to the development:
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.
• DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Understood.
2. A subdivision exemption for the aggregation of Lots 5 & 6 must be approved and recorded prior to the
approval of any building permit related to this Site Plan application.
• DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: A subdivision exemption has been submitted to city planning and
engineering (application #21392). Comments have been received and responses/corrections
have been made. This application has been resubmitted to the city concurrently with this Site
Plan Application.
Section 3 – Required Code Corrections
Please note that these code corrections must be addressed in order to obtain adequacy of this application:
Current Planning Division, Nakeisha Lyon, nlyon@bozeman.net, 406-582-2963:
1. General Comments –
a. The legal description denoted on the submitted SID waiver appears to be incorrect.
i. Please revise the legal description accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: SID waiver as been revised. Corrected document has been
resubmitted as part of this application.
b. There are several inconsistencies between the submitted A1 Form and Project Narrative (i.e. the
denoted square footage is different, the indicated height is different, etc.).
i. Please revise these inconsistencies accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Project Narrative and A1 form have been revised to correct these
inconsistencies. Both documents have been resubmitted as part of this application.
c. Please review plans for any grammar errors (i.e. misspellings in call-outs on various plans –
example: trees spelled incorrectly under parking lot landscaping notes on the Landscape Plan,
monument spelled incorrectly on Site Plan Details for signage).
i. These grammatical errors should be revised accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Spelling and grammar errors have been corrected.
d. Please ensure landscape plans and 3D perspectives are consistent (i.e. street trees in different
places along Southwest view).
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: 3D perspectives are not intended to illustrate the landscape design.
3D images are to show the overall building form and color pallet. Please refer to L1.0 for
landscape design. A note has been added to the perspective sheets to clarify the purpose of the
drawing.
2. Site Plan Checklist (SP) & submittal requirements – BMC 38.220.080
a. Please provide the square footage of land that is landscaped on the Cover Sheet.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Landscape square footage has been added to the cover sheet.
Corrections have been clouded and sheets have been resubmitted.
b. Please provide formal cash-in-lieu of water rights calculations and payment amount certified by
the City’s Engineering Division (Griffin Nielson).
i. Staff has followed up on the previously submitted request from September on November
12, 2021.
1. These applicable fees will be due prior to SP approval.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Understood, Nakesha has followed up with Griffin Nielsen on 11/12
and we are waiting for additional information regarding the CIL amount.
c. The approved final plat denotes a 1’ No Access Strip 150’ to and from Prince Lane which has not
been included on the existing and proposed site plans.
i. Please include this no access strip accordingly on the applicable drawings.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The 1’ No access strip has been added to both the existing site plan
and proposed new site plan. Corrections have been clouded and sheets have been
resubmitted.
d. The Planning and Zoning Department contact should be revised from Lynn Hyde to Nakeisha
Lyon accordingly with updated contact information. (C0.10).
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Contact information has been updated. Corrections have been
clouded and sheets have been resubmitted.
e. The construction management plan must include the exterior construction period material
staging, spoils location and construction trash enclosure location(s). A trash container type must
be provided and detailed (40 yard roll off, fenced enclosure, etc.). If spoils storage is proposed a
timeline for removal must be provided.
i. Please revise and address accordingly on Sheet C0.15 Construction Route Map and/or
provide additional sheets to meet this requirement.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: This information was provided on CM1.0.
3. DRB review thresholds - BMC 38.230.040.
a. The Design Review Board or Administrative Design Review Board is required based on the
proposed thirty thousand or more square feet of office space, retail commercial space, service
commercial space or industrial space.
i. This review will occur upon adequacy of this application.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Understood. After conversations with Nakeisha Lyon we of the
understanding that this will likely be presented to the Administrative Design Review Board by
Nakeisha.
4. Improvements and securities - BMC 38.270.
a. If any necessary on-site and/or off-site improvements are required that the applicant would like
to construct during vertical construction, please provide a formal request for concurrent
construction in conformance with this section of the BMC.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Concurrent construction request has been submitted. See ‘Site Plan
Concurrency Request_12032021’
5. Form and intensity standards - BMC 38.320.
a. Please provide the lot coverage calculations on the cover sheet.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Calculation has been provided on the cover sheet. Corrections have been
clouded and sheets have been resubmitted.
6. Mail delivery - BMC 38.410.120.
a. If mail delivery will not be to each individual lot within the development, the developer must
provide an off-street area for mail delivery within the development in cooperation with the
United States Postal Service. The city will not be responsible for maintaining or plowing any mail
delivery area constructed within a city right-of-way.
i. Please provide details on the mail delivery mechanism that will be utilized for the
proposed building.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: There are two, free standing mailboxes approved by the USPS
installed at the site.
As soon as the USPS authorizes delivery, they will be activated with keys given out by
the USPS to the individual owners.
7. Other Block Frontage - BMC 38.510.030.G.
a. The primary entrance of the proposed building must be designed, visible, and orientated
towards Prince Lane in order to meet the provision of the Other Block Frontage Standard.
i. Please revise the design of the primary entrance to be visible from all viewpoints along
Prince Lane.
1. Based on the existing design of the building, proposed use, and zoning district, a
departure regarding this requirement would be support by Community
Development Staff.
a. If a departure is requested, it must be applied for consistent with Sec.
38.250.060.
b. A narrative must be provided stating which section of the BMC is
proposed for departure, the scope and extent of the proposed departure
and a response to the required departure criteria.
c. Please clearly show the proposed departure within the plan set or on a
separate exhibit and ensure the narrative refers to the sheet number
accordingly.
d. A separate request and fee is applicable to each departure.
i. Please demonstrate conformance with this provision in reference
to the building entrance or apply for a departure accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The preference of the Owner and the Design Team is to keep the doors oriented
towards the parking lot. We would like to request a departure for this design element, based on
conversations with Nakeisha Lyon, this departure would be supported. We will add this to our Departure
narrative.
b. Departure Request for Façade Transparency Element
i. The applicant submitted a departure request for the façade transparency requirements
denoted within this section of the BMC which is applicable to the east and south
elevations of the building.
1. In consideration of the overall design of the building, proposed use, zoning
district, internal functionality of the building, and submitted justification for the
departure, Community Development Staff is in support of the request and will
submit this recommendation accordingly to the Community Development
Director upon adequacy of this application.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Thank you.
c. For any transparent design elements such as windows and doors, please provide a glass sample
and corner window sample prior to the approval of a building permit for this proposed
development.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Transparent elements consist of clear insulated glazing and Kalwall.
Samples will be submitted to Nakeisha Lyon upon resubmittal of this Site Plan Application.
8. Non-motorized circulation and design - BMC 38.520.040.
a. Please clarify the pathway width adjacent to the parking spaces to the southwest of the building
and the angled truck parking.
i. The Bluebeam measuring tool is providing width measurements inconsistent with this
section of the BMC.
1. Additional width callouts may be included in order to provided necessary
clarification.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Original sidewalks were designed at 5’ wide per BMC 38.540.020
figure A, C and D. Per conversations with Nakeisha Lyon, this information is incorrect and
Section 38.520.040 should be followed. Corrections have been made and dimensions have
been added. Sheets have been clouded and resubmitted.
9. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment - BMC 38.520.070.
a. The sides and rear of service enclosures must be screened with landscaping at least five feet
wide in locations visible from the street, parking lots, and pathways to soften views of the
screening element and add visual interest.
i. Please revise the design accordingly to address screening from the pedestrian pathways
and adjacent properties along the following:
1. North and south of the trash enclosure
2. South of the service enclosure (on the southern portion of the property along
Prince Lane)
3. There is a departure opportunity for this provision which may be considered per
section 38.250.060 provided the enclosure and landscaping treatment meet the
intent of the standards and add visual interest to site users.
a. Based on the location and viewpoints of these areas, Community
Development Staff would not support this departure request at this time.
i. If a departure is requested, it must be applied for consistent with
Sec. 38.250.060.
ii. A narrative must be provided stating which section of the BMC is
proposed for departure, the scope and extent of the proposed
departure and a response to the required departure criteria.
iii. Please clearly show the proposed departure within the plan set or
on a separate exhibit and ensure the narrative refers to the sheet
number accordingly.
iv. A separate request and fee is applicable to each departure.
1. Please demonstrate conformance with this provision in
reference to the screening provisions for service areas or
apply for a departure accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The trash enclosure is located behind a 6’ tall, opaque security fence and
will not be visible from the general parking area or any other pedestrian pathway. Because of the
trash enclosure’s location, we would request a departure from landscaping around the enclosure.
An additional departure request will be added to the project narrative.
As for the service enclosure on the south elevation, we will add landscaping to comply with this
requirement. Revisions have been made and clouded on sheet L1.0.
b. All rooftop mechanical equipment, including air conditioners, heaters, vents, and similar
equipment must be fully screened from public view both at grade and from higher buildings
with the exception of solar panels and roof-mounted wind turbines. Screening must be located
so as not to interfere with operation of the equipment.
i. Please clarify the rooftop air handler unit screening for those on the warehouse space
area as they do not appear to be in conformance with this standard on the 3D view
perspectives.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: There are (4) mechanical units mounted to the exterior
storage roof. This roof covering has been designed with extra tall parapets to screen the
mechanical equipment as much as possible. Please refer to the West Elevation for
clarification.
10. Blank wall treatments. BMC 38.530.070.
a. Please address blanks walls on the north and west facades of the proposed building.
i. From the proposed plans and perspectives, the north façade of the building has not been
addressed in conformance with this provision.
1. Given that significant parts of this façade are visible from pedestrian and
motorist views along Nelson Road, blank walls must be mitigated in conformance
with this standard.
ii. The west portion of the west façade of the proposed building has a monotonous design
based on the pre-finished metal wall panel area.
1. Given the visibility of this portion of the building to employees and delivery
workers, this blank wall could be broken up through landscaping design within
the proposed rock mulch area.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: If there was ever a desire to expand the warehouse, the
intent would be to grow the facility to the North. For this reason, the North
elevation has been kept simple so as to not waste resources and design energy on
an elevation that may get demoed in the future. Also, because this elevation does
not directly face Nelson RD and adding glazing has a direct negative affect on the
product being stored, we have purposefully omitted any glazing. We did however
add aluminum composite panel to mimic some of the other design elements
elsewhere on the building.
In regards to the West elevation, the metal panel siding has been designed with
the panel joints articulated to mimic some of the other rhythms created by the
doors and windows at the office area. The intent is to provide a simple and
effective screen for the empty kegs and pallets that will be stored in this area. We
would also like to point out that the west side of this facility is dedicated to the
utilitarian side of the warehouse and will not be viewed by the public or even seen
from any public way (there will be a 7’ tall, opaque security fence around the
entire loading dock area). The owner has also expressed a desire to maintain a
simplistic approach to the design elements in the loading dock area so as to not
distract the truck drivers from safely navigating their equipment in and out of the
loading docks.
For the reasons outlined above we would request the City of Bozeman to consider
a departure for these elevations. We will add a departure request to the project
narrative.
iii. There is a departure opportunity for this provision which may be support by Community
Development Staff based on the proposed use of the building.
1. If a departure is requested, it must be applied for consistent with Sec.
38.250.060.
2. A narrative must be provided stating which section of the BMC is proposed for
departure, the scope and extent of the proposed departure and a response to the
required departure criteria.
3. Please clearly show the proposed departure within the plan set or on a separate
exhibit and ensure the narrative refers to the sheet number accordingly.
4. A separate request and fee is applicable to each departure.
a. Please demonstrate conformance with this provision in reference to the
blank wall treatment provisions or apply for a departure accordingly.
11. Parking – BMC 38.540.
a. The denoted parking calculations for the warehouse facility appear to be inconsistent with the
indicated square footage of the building. However, it appears that the proposal elects to utilize
the alternative net parking calculation rather than the traditional parking calculation (0.85).
i. If the applicant will be utilizing the alternative denoted gross floor area calculation (net),
rather than the traditional calculation (0.85), such election must be made in writing to
the Community Development Director, must be signed and acknowledged by the owner,
and must be filed with the Community Development Director prior to the issuance of a
building permit for such building. The owner is also responsible for certifying other
information upon which parking requirements may be based, such as seats, and the
number of employees on maximum working shift.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: We would request to utilize the alterative net parking calculation for the
warehouse area but will use the traditional method for the office space. We have added a narrative
requesting the use of the alternative net parking area.
1. Please provide this information accordingly or revise calculations to the
traditional calculation methodology.
b. Bicycle parking is required and must be provided in accordance with this section of the BMC.
i. Please demonstrate bicycle parking spaces, locations, dimensions, and rack details
accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Bicycle parking has been proved. Refer to SD1.1 (Near the
main entrance)
12. Landscaping – BMC 38.550.
a. Based on the parking calculation comments above, tree and landscaping requirements for
parking lots may be impacted.
i. Please revise these components accordingly, if applicable.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Based on the alternative net parking calculation, the stalls provided
meet the minimum requirement, therefor landscaping as it relates to parking lots has remain
as previously designed.
b. In accordance with Sec. 38.410.080.H, stormwater retention and detention facilities must be
landscaped and design as amenities.
i. Please provide this information accordingly on the landscape plan for all stormwater
facilities within the proposed subject property. Additional sheets may be required.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Landscaping at retention ponds have been revised to meet
this section of the code. Cross section detail has been provided as well. See L1.0 and L1.1
13. Signs - BMC 38.560.
a. Please note a separate sign and building permit must be obtain prior to the construction,
placement, erection or modification of any signage in conformance with this section of the BMC.
b. Please revise signage calculations to show accurate calculations (i.e. the first 25 feet for each
street frontage would be multiplied by 3 sf instead of 2 sf based on the applicable footnote, and
then the remainder would be multiplied by 1.5 sf).
c. The maximum square footage of a monument signage is 32 sf.
i. Please revise accordingly.
d. Only one freestanding sign is allowed.
i. Please revise accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: For comments a, b, c, and d, please refer to the attached correspondence
labeled “Monument Sign Correspondence”. Based on this correspondence, it is our assumption the
monument sign is acceptable as designed.
e. Please ensure the proposed illumination for the denoted wall sign on the south elevation is in
conformance with limitations denoted in Sec. 38.560.120.
i. This may be addressed within this application or during the applicable separate sign and
building permit process as denoted above.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The wall mounted sign will follow limitations as out lined in
38.560.120. Specific details will be provided during the separate sign permit application.
f. The proposed monument signage is indicated to be installed within applicable utility easements
which is allowed with the understanding that the sign may be excavated in order to do necessary
maintenance and work. Sign replacement would be at the property owner’s expense.
i. Staff encourages that the proposed monument signage be installed outside of any
easements to avoid this risk.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The preferred sign location is as currently shown on the
site plan. To minimize the risk of damage or removal caused by utility work the
owner has elected to install this sign at a later date once neighboring properties
have been further developed. The hope is the likelihood of any utility work would be
less once other properties have been developed. The documents will note this sign
as “future sign”.
1. Please amend the proposed sign location accordingly, or provide a written
statement acknowledging the denoted information above.
14. Lighting – BMC 38.570.
a. Please provide further information within the lighting plans regarding the basic and security
lighting proposed, and horizontal illuminance and vertical illuminance on site.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The proposed lighting for the site was designed as security lighting because
of the large volume of goods on-site as well as support for the anticipated security system. The
anticipated operating hours for the facility is 7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. for office staff and 8:00 a.m. - 12:00
a.m. for warehouse staff. All exterior designed lighting is intended as site lighting and no new street
lighting is being provided under this project.
b. Please provide the uniformity ratio as denoted within this section of the BMC.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Information on uniformity ration has been added to sheet E0.5
c. Illuminance for building entrances must average 5.0 maintained footcandles.
i. Please revise photometric plan accordingly to meet this requirement as it appears the
front entrance may be too bright (calculated average of 7.65 footcandles).
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Illuminance at building entrances has been adjusted. See
revised photometric site plan
d. 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.
i. The property boundaries around the drive access/approaches have footcandles in excess
of 1.0. Please revise accordingly.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Illuminance at property boundaries near public rights-of-way have
been adjusted. See revised photometric site plan.
Engineering Comments, Mikaela Schultz, EI, Engineer I, mschultz@bozeman.net:
1. Please see the attached Engineering Memo.
Northwestern Energy (NWE) Comments, Tom Stewart, District Engineer,
thomas.stewart@northwestern.com, 406-582-0573:
1. The NWE Project Engineer assigned to the proposed site plan is Dustin Collins,
Dustin.Collins@contractor.northwestern.com.
2. The screened utility service area meets the requirements for a screened wall and separation to the
meter and transformer locations. One issue may be the location of the transformer or orientation of the
proposed transformer. The transformer high side or primary side is on the left side of the transformer
and the low side or service side is on the right side of the transformer. The transformer may need to be
moved to the west six feet so the transformer doors open to the east and the 10-foot clearance is on the
east side of the transformer. With the ability to access the area through an opening in the southwest
corner of the utility area a 12-foot wide gate is recommended in addition to the access opening where a
utility line truck can access the transformer to install or replace the transformer if it should fail. All other
clearances meet NWE requirements as long as all the material within 10 feet meets current NEC or
NFPA requirements for non-combustible material.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: We will continue to work with NWE on fine tuning the transformer location and
orientation. We have also been in communication with Derek Westveer regarding some of these items. We
will explore options for gate access or removable panels in the screen wall for additional access.
3. Primary will need to be extended to the proposed transformer location which will require an easement
up to the transformer.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Easement to final transformer location will be provided.
4. Once an application for new service has been submitted to NorthWestern Energy the project will be
assigned to the NWE project engineer. Go to www.northwesternenergy.com/construction to apply
online Montana Construction Application, and access Montana New Service Guide to provide
information on electric and gas service requirements. The calculated gas and electric loads do not need
to be submitted at this time however, the calculated loads for gas and electric will be needed once
available to determine size of gas and electric services and transformer size.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: This process has been started and is being led up by Bryan Tate (owner
representative)
Solid Waste Division; Russ Ward, rward@bozeman.net, 406-582-3235
1. Must have minimum of 10 foot clear opening measured from door jamb to door jamb (not from center of
door support post).
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The clear opening has been revised to 10’ clear between bollards. Please refer to
SD1.2 for revisions.
2. Roof of enclosure may not overhang the clear opening to allow for truck access.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: All overhangs have been omitted. Please refer to SD1.2 for revisions.
3. Enclosure pad needs to be flush with the ground.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Enclosure pad will be designed flush with the adjacent asphalt paving. Any curb and
gutter in this area will be a laydown curb.
Forestry Division; Alex Nordquest, anordquest@bozeman.net, 406-582-3205
1. A 10’ minimum distance is required from underground utilities, hydrants, or streetlights for any
proposed boulevard trees.
a. Please revise this accordingly for proposed boulevard trees along Prince Lane.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Trees have been adjusted accordingly and notes have been added to clarify
the 10’ requirement. Refer to L1.0 and SD1.1 for revisions.
2. Proposed boulevard trees, plantings, fencing, etc, must not be located within any street vision triangles.
a. Please revise this accordingly for proposed boulevard trees along Prince Lane.
b. Please indicate the street vision triangle on the landscape plan to ensure this is met.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: All landscape elements are located outside street vision triangles. Street vision
triangles have been added to the landscape plan. Refer to L1.0 and SD1.1 for revisions.
Fire Department; Scott Mueller, smueller@bozeman.net, 406-582-2382
1. A nox-box key access system for access gates is required for the Fire Department and Police Department
to access the location during emergencies.
a. Please reflect this accordingly on the plans. Please contact Scott Mueller for more information.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: A knox-box will be incorporated into the secure gate system for FD and PD
use.
These divisions did not provide comments, contact reviewers directly with questions.
Building Division; Ben Abbey, babbey@bozeman.net, 406-582-2377
Parks and Recreation; Addi Jadin, ajadin@bozeman.net, 406-582-2908
Sustainability Division; Natalie Meyer, nmeyer@bozeman.net, 406-582-2317
Stormwater Division; Adam Oliver, aoliver@bozeman.net, 406-582-2270
Water and Sewer Division; John Alston, jalston@bozeman.net, 406-582-3200
Future Impact Fees - Please note that future building permit applications will require payment of the required
transportation, water, sewer and fire impact fees according to the City of Bozeman adopted impact fee schedule
in place at the time of building permit issuance. If you desire an estimate of the required impact fees according to
current rates please contact the Department of Community Development and/or visit www.bozeman.net.
Note: With this memo, Staff has found the application to be inadequate for continued review. During
review of subsequent revisions, additional conditions of approval may be recommended based on
comments and recommendations provided by other applicable review agencies involved with the review
of the project.
MEMORANDUM
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO: Nakeisha Lyon, Planner II
FROM: Mikaela Schultz, Engineer I
RE: Bronken Warehouse Site Plan
APPLICATION NO 21389
DATE: November 12, 2021
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These comments are provided in reference to the August 13, 2021 submittal.
ENGINEERING COMMENTS:
General
1. BMC 38.240 Part 4. Subdivision Exemption - The applicant must aggregate lots 5 and 6 of the
Nelson Meadows subdivision per the city subdivision exemption process prior to site plan
approval.
a. The Subdivision Exemption approval will be conditional of storm drainage infrastructure
approval. Upon acceptance of infrastructure a release and re conveyance of the existing
storm drainage easement must be executed prior to subdivision exemption approval.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The storm drainage infrastructure as well as a draft release and
reconveyance easement document has been submitted to city engineering concurrently with
this resubmittal.
2. DSSP Plans and Specification Review Policy - Plans, specifications, and submittals for public
infrastructure improvements to the storm drain must be submitted to the City Engineering
Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for infrastructure review.
a. Submit a new 30’ storm drainage easement with infrastructure submittal. This easement
must be executed prior to infrastructure approval. A City standard storm drainage
easement template is attached to this transmittal.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: A draft of the new 30’ storm drainage easement has been
included with the storm infrastructure submittal to City Engineering.
3. DSSP Fire Service Line Standard - Plans for all fire service lines must be submitted to the City
Engineering Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for review. The applicant must prepare
plans and specifications for any fire service line in accordance with the City’s Fire Service Line
Policy. The plans must be prepared by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved
by the City Engineer prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system.
The applicant must also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection,
post-construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and
domestic services 4” or larger, must be a standalone submittal, separate from the site plan
submittal. City of Bozeman applications for service must be completed by the applicant.
Site plan review may continue while subdivision exemption processing is taking place. Site plan approval
will be conditional of the subdivision exemption approval. The applicant should contact the review
engineer with any processing questions.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Plans for the fire service line have been included in the infrastructure submittal
to City Engineering.
Easements
1. BMC 38.410.060 Easements
a. The applicant must provide a ten foot utility easement (power, gas, communication,
etc.) along the developments property frontage prior to Site Plan approval.
i. The utility easement should be submitted with the Subdivision Exemption
application for review/approval.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: A public utility easement already exists along the entire property
frontage, see subdivision exemption for amended plat exhibit. For the proposed transformer, a
draft of the 10’ PUE for NWE has been included with the other easements in the infrastructure
submittal
Stormwater
1. DSSP Section II (B) Storm Drainage Plan - The applicant must review DSSP Section II (B) and
ensure that the submittal includes the specified requirements.
a. The applicant must also include certification by a professional engineer that the storm
sewer and adjacent storm water tract 2 pond can meet the standards of the Nelson
Meadows Subdivision Comprehensive Drainage Plan.
The storm drainage calculations do not include reference or detail on the subject
properties runoff volumes with respect to the assigned volumes in the existing Nelson
Meadows Subdivision Comprehensive Drainage Plan. The applicant must provide a
summary of the subject properties effect on the subdivision storm water plan.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The storm report has been modified to include a summary
of the property’s effect on the subdivision storm water plan
2. BMC 40.04.700 (A.5) Drainage Report Calculations and Certification - All drainage system
reports, peak flow rates and runoff volume calculations, safety requirements, and grading plans
shall be certified by a licensed professional authorized by the state to perform such functions.
a. The applicant must have the engineer certify the report.
b. Possible puddling at the western curb island-see markup.
c. It appears that a large portion of the Basin #2 storm runoff is routed through a storm
drain pipe to pond #4. Pond #4 is included in drainage basin #3 calculations. Please
correct this runoff/basin error.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The drainage report, grading and exhibits have been
modified to correct these comments.
3. DSSP II.B.5 Storm Drainage Maintenance Plan - Identify ownership of all facilities. Establish a
schedule for maintenance activities necessary to keep the system operationally effective.
Identify the responsible party in charge of the specific maintenance duties.
The applicant must define ownership and the responsible party for maintenance duties
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The storm drainage maintenance plan has been revised to
define ownership of the responsible party for maintenance duties.
4. BMC 38.410.080 (F) Front Setback - Storm water facilities generally must not occupy more than
one-third of a required front setback. Departures will be considered (per section 38.250.060) for
storm water facilities with Low Impact Development (LID) components, underground
components, or exceptional design.
Basin 3 occupies the 20’ front setback and PUE. The basin must be moved out of the
PUE.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Basin 3 has been moved outside the 20’ front setback and PUE
5. DSSP II.A.3.c Erosion Protection- Pond inlet and outlet piping shall be protected and designed to
prevent erosion (i.e. splash pads, rip rap, etc.).
The storm water drainage report mentions inclusion of and RCP flared section and rip
rap at the subdivision storm water pond. The applicant should include details for these
features in the detail drawings.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The grading and drainage plans have been revised to show outlet
protection
6. DSSP II.A.3.f Inlet Sumps - Inlets and manholes shall have 9-inch sumps for sediment collection
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
The public storm drain manhole should be submitted with separate infrastructure
review and designed in accordance with these standards and the City Standard
drawings.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: A separate infrastructure plan showing the public storm drain
manhole will be submitted with separate infrastructure review.
Water Rights
1. BMC 38.410.130 A. 1. Water Rights - The applicant must contact Griffin Nielsen with the City
Engineering Department to obtain a determination of cash-in-lieu (CIL) of water rights for any
irrigation. Payment will be required prior to site plan approval.
Conformation is pending. Conformation must be received prior to site plan approval.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Understood, Nakesha has followed up with Griffin Nielsen on 11/12 and we
are waiting for additional information regarding the CIL amount.
Water and Wastewater
1. BMC 38.410.070 and DSSP.V.A, B – Prior to a determination of adequacy the applicant must
provide an estimate the average and max day demands of domestic water and wastewater
usage for the proposed site development. The estimates must be certified by a professional
engineer and reported with respect to the existing Nelson Meadows subdivision Water and
Wastewater design report.
Water Report:
DSSP V A - A water design report must be prepared by a professional engineer for the proposed
project. The water distribution system must be designed to meet the maximum day demand
plus fire flow and the peak hour demand.
a. The proposed average daily flow and peak flow plus fire flow for the Bronken
Warehouse is greater than the predicted average daily flow and peak flow in the
subdivision water report. Additionally, the subdivision plat includes reference to low
pressures within the development. The difference in proposed vs. predicted flow
volume must be accounted for using a booster pump. Please submit booster pump
design that will meet the development demands.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The water design report has been revised to better illustrate the
proposed vs predicted flows. Flow data from the City of Bozeman’s water model have been
added to the design report to provide additional information on pressures in this area. The
reason why there were references to low pressures within the development on the plat is
because the plat was created before the completion of the Capital Improvements Project for
the water line connection in that area.
Sewer Report:
DSSP 6” diameter sewer service- The design standard drawing (No. 02730-2,3) specifies SDR 26
PVC pipe for sanitary sewer services. The applicant has proposed SDR 35 PVC, this does not
meet the city standard. The applicant must specify SDR 26 PVC in the plan drawings and
specifications.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The utility plan C3.0 has been modified to show the COB standard
pipe material for sanitary sewer services.
Transportation
1. BMC 38.400.090 Access Standards– The drive approaches on the subject site must be constructed
in accordance with the city’s standard approach, which includes a concrete apron, sidewalk
section and drop-curb.
Include reference to the city standard drawing on the plan set.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The city standard drawing has been referenced on the site plan
a. The applicant has requested a temporary access to the site along Nelson Drive. This
temporary access cannot be granted by the city as it is along a 1’ No access strip
established in the existing plat. The applicant must build access to the site within the
existing 30’ public right of way along the north property boundary.
i. The applicant will be responsible to provide an agreement to maintain the access
drive in the 30’ public right of way until a city standard local street is constructed.
Prior to future site plan submittal, the applicant will need to coordinate with the
City on the exact language of the maintenance agreement.
The applicant must reach out to the review engineer to draft the maintenance
agreement.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The owner’s attorney has drafted an agreement which
has been sent to the city attorney. The draft maintenance agreement has been
included as part of this submittal.
ii. The applicant will be responsible to build the driveway approach to non-
residential standard per DSSP standard drawing 02529-12 and demonstrate that
the proposed turning radii are adequate for truck traffic. The city encourages a
possible shared access solution with the adjacent property to the north given the
proximity of the adjacent drive approach, BMC 38.400.090 F.
Include reference to the city standard drawing on the plan set.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Driveway approaches in the plan set have been modified to
match city standard and now reference the city standard drawing
b. DSSP standard drawing 02529-12- The applicant has proposed two driveway approaches
along Prince Lane to access the site. These driveway aprons must be built to non-
residential standard.
Include reference to the city standard drawing on the plan set.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Driveway approaches in the plan set have been modified to match
city standard and now reference the city standard drawing
Special Improvements Districts
1. City of Bozeman Resolution 5076, Policy 1 - The applicant must provide and file with the County
Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement
Districts (SID’s) on City standard form for the following:
a. Street improvements to Prince Lane between Nelson Road and Frontage Road including
lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
b. Street improvements to Royal Wolf Way between Nelson Road and northern right-of-way
established with the Nelson Meadows Subdivision plat including lighting, signalization,
paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
c. Street improvements to Nelson Road including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter,
sidewalk, and storm drainage.
d. Street improvements to Frontage Road between Nelson Road and East Valley Center
Spur/Prince Lane including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and
storm drainage.
e. Intersection improvements at Prince Lane and Nelson Road including lighting,
signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
f. Intersection improvements at Prince Lane and Royal Wolf Way including lighting,
signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
g. Intersection improvements at Prince Lane and Frontage Road Avenue including lighting,
signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
h. Intersection improvements at Royal Wolf Way and Nelson Road including lighting,
signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
i. Intersection improvements to Nelson Road and Frontage Road including lighting,
signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
j. Intersection improvements to East Valley Center Spur and Frontage Road including
lighting, signalization/channelization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage.
The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these
improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the
completion of the improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square
footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development,
or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the filed SID waiver prior to the
site plan approval. The city standard SID waiver template is attached.
The applicant provided and adequate draft. The filed SID waiver must be submitted to the review
engineer prior to site plan approval.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: The SID waiver was sent back due to an issue with the notary block.
Corrections have been made and has been resubmitted. We will file the SID waiver and provide to the
review engineer.
ENGINEERING ADVISORY COMMENTS:
1. DSSP Section V A 6.b. – Plans and specifications prepared by a professional engineer licensed in
the state of Montana shall be submitted for 4" diameter and larger service lines. Water service
pipe shall be ductile iron for services 4" diameter and larger.
Plans for the 4” service line may be submitted with the fire service line to the City Engineering
Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for review. The applicant must prepare plans and
specifications for any 4” or larger service line in accordance with the City’s DSSP. The plans must
be prepared by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved by the City Engineer
prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system. The applicant must
also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction
certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and domestic services
4” or larger, must be a standalone submittal, separate from the site plan submittal. City of
Bozeman applications for service must be completed by the applicant.
DESIGN TEAM RESPONSE: Understood the plans and specifications for the proposed fire service have
been submitted separately to the City of Bozeman Engineering as a part of the infrastructure package.