The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-17-23 Public Comment - M. Wictor - Canyon Gate _ App22264 Ask Questions NOW & Add Conditions of Approval for PrelimPlatFrom:Mary Wictor To:Agenda Subject:4/17/2023 Public Comment ~ Canyon Gate / App22264 Ask Questions NOW & Add Conditions of Approval for PrelimPlat Date:Monday, April 17, 2023 12:00:46 PM Attachments:PublicComment 4-17-2023 Canyon Gate App 22264 for City Commission 10pgs.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Please scroll down to see attached pages 4/17/2023 Public Comment ~ Canyon Gate / App22264 Ask Questions NOW & AddConditions of Approval for PrelimPlat From:Mary Wictor (mwictor@yahoo.com) To:mwictor@yahoo.com Date:Monday, April 17, 2023 at 10:53 AM PDT Dear City of Bozeman For City Commission & cc: ComDevBoard re: Preliminary Plat review for Canyon Gate (Application #: 22264) scheduled for 4/18/2023 Please use Facts given & presented on following pages ==> Look at the land ~ ASK these & other Questions ~ to know NOW, not later ADD suggested and suitable Conditions of Approval to require these be addressed by the Applicant/Developer to increase success! Groves of significant Cottonwood/Aspen trees stand growing naturally where it is wet, never cleared even for farming, & suckup water Q1) if trees/swales are not saved, won’t removal of 110+ large trees increase the groundwater level to be even higher? Only 1- and 2-story buildings present and historically in this area, thus foundations have NOT needed to be dug very deep (~ 3-4 feet), HIGH GROUNDWATER exists in this area with westward flows both underground and above ground to and through Canyon Gate Q2) How will tall buildings (up to 50ft or 4 stories in height, whichever is greater) be built with the groundwater being so high here? + How deep will the digging go--what is expected? [4 stories X-feet deep? 3-stories 6-7ft deep, MT frostline depth 61in… NEED "separation" from groundwater?] A multitude of County parcels with a water well for drinking and a septic system for wastewater lie adjacent to Canyon Gate on W-SW-SQ3) How will C.G. development provide Water Quality treatment & stormwater/drainage to NOT adversely impact so many adjacent existing water wells (plus, the aquifer), septic systems + avoid flooding impacts? At Preliminary Plat the three (3) WET Utilities of Water, Sewer, & Stormdrainage are planned and "set". Piped stormwater must know depth & slope at which to install them, size (diameter), and kind of pipe to use, plus where & how large retention/detention vaults areQ4) There appears to be a LARGE NUMBER of stormwater Vaults? How do these work with buildings, roads, & open spaces? Can combining some stormwater vaults add more flood capacity + reduce maintenance/$’s? Additionally, with High Groundwater, isn't ability to infiltrate stormwater impacted or threaten Water Quality? No recent FEMA Flood data exists (1980s, 1982, with no update starting until 2025+), Bridger Creek does flood plus beavers impact. Weather changes are happening & Climate Change impacts increasing--volume changes, intensity/frequency, snow piles, melt, runoff -Code/regulations are like a cook book recipe and are ONLY MINIMUMS; Water is a force of nature & flooding hazardous/disastrous! -Applicant Civil Engineer said there was more creek depth than modeling used, but Public Comment stated massive sedimentation exists +Preliminary Plat must show where roads and drainage will go--it's not really able to be changed later... so ask and address NOW! Q5) How can C.G. engineering today model/accommodate stormwater management/drainage, plus future potential for flooding, overflows, without impacting adjacent Lands/Legends I & II or downgradient areas or outfall/flow to properties. Use % (133%, 180%, etc.), other things? NOTE also BMC/UDC 38.410.010 A-C. It is UNACCEPTABLE for Flooding Hazards and potential to be relegated to "later" with only writing notes on the Plat to warn or "suggest" Flood Insurance which is NOT affordable, highly unavailable [stated during Public Comment given 4/3/2023 at CDB] plus one can't even purchase it unless located in an actual flood plain--flood hazard mapping must be "known" to even qualify. Staff report page13 of 37 states, "acknowledging the risk of proceeding with development review applications prior to updated FEMA maps" requiring the Applicant to hold forever harmless and indemnify the city against claims. This is not enough for public nor City--don't allow developer/applicant to build, sell, and leave the $results$ & flooding to those thereafter. ADD CONDITION OF APPROVAL AS REQUIREMENT Developer/applicant shall either get or determine more real/current flood data, or provide suitable engineering analysis / design to eliminate and/or overcome flooding & high water table (groundwater)—to avoid impacts to existing & future area owners, residents, shoppers or others visitoring this "node". NOTE again BMC/UDC 38.410.010 C. Lands Unsuitable for development ... potential flooding hazard, high water table (groundwater) Historic farm field under Legends II has natural swales and gravelly places indicating there have indeed been past times of high flows. Legends II green stormwater design reflects this--as a PUD additional Open Spaces were given to keep natural swales to spread and slow any high flows, while allowing overflows from Bridger Creek to head west to C.G., as is historically present in the existing Lands. Q6) How handle when Bridger Creek really may flood? Ask about the designed pipe sizes and vault capacities? Retention and detention of stormwater must be engineered with "extra" & certainly more thansufficient capacity for potential future flooding plus handling ALL the impervious surfaces being added for Canyon Gate itself. Canyon Gate can't just stop/plug up water... and should NOT be allowed to just send flows as appears directed to the North-side ditch along Story Mill Road, that might subsequently flood long-existing homes and that road access and County bridge at Bridger Creek. Real, comprehensive Stormwater management is essential and must be determined and provision for increases in future flood hazards. CONNECTIVITY & Road Access Legends II on south-side Alley provides Water & Sewer mains and access for Bridger Drive homes/lots to Connect to Water & Sewer.Q7) Does Canyon Gate Blvd design on South allow Bridger Dr. homes/lots connect Water &Sewer? Traffic will come driving from Bozeman & Bridger Canyon. Review the accesses to ensure allow/support drive, walk, bike, micromobility Q8) How does and will Preliminary Plat ACCESS design best serve B2-M Commercial areas now/future? B-2M zoning (especially commercial) needs primary access by Arterial--directly off/to Bridger Drive / Highway 86 Q9) Why is there NO access to Arterial (Hwy 86/Bridger Dr.) especially for commercial? Internal roads for Canyon Gate appear to be 35-foot wide streets / standards Q10) Why is the Application to MDT only for a 26-foot wide access to Arterial? There is only 1 Main entrance for public to Canyon Gate along the collector Story Mill Road, but also private drive entrance/exits Q11) Why is the MAIN entrance off collector Story Mill Road only a standard size? Won’t most (perhaps 80%) of the traffic enter/exit here? Shouldn't there be a wider entrance, marquis, etc.? Q12) How will transit occur in the future, as walk score is low 30 (vs 48 average/Bozeman)? Where are pedestrian crossings going to implemented to all and encourage safe walking? Bus service will be needed one day--sooner than later. Plan ahead to ensure there is space--make changes needed NOW to road/access Q13) Where can a bus pull out, shelter, load/unload people & equipment, then pull back and/or turn around? Since walkability score is so low, ensure sufficient parking for residents, owners, and visitors to area and commercial... available & safe Q14) Where do people visiting Canyon Gate park? Would/will parking on Canyon Gate Blvd be problematic due to limited site-distance on curves? Fire response needs to be quick, routes to hospital available/clear, train crossings have delaysQ15) What City of Bozeman plans or revisions will there be for fire stations & emergencies in this area? Local street connections ~ definitely need Traffic Calming measures to encourage and really ensure vehicles go slowly for safety of allQ16) Glad to see short curvilinear road connections to Maiden Spirit & Northview Streets (really must be required). How much will the curves illustrated physically require vehicles to slow down (e.g., to 15mph via physical vertical curbs, radius of curve yet allow snowplows?) Should these be made more curvey now? What can be done to slow and reduce traffic to the Sprit Crossing local road connection which is "straight"? The road connection from Canyon Gate to Nortview St to Bridger Drive is critical. Q17) The road connection from Canyon Gate to Northview St to Bridger Drive is critical. Will the developer continue to pursue this via Legends II HOA appropriate as it is needed? Can CityCommission strongly support the need for this connection for success and good of all? Q18) Snow removal responsibility is to be assigned, but Where will snow storage be allowed, as it will certainly be needed—and this winter Oct-Apr is a reminder of that? Please continue to the following pages for visuals provided to help inform and reinforce points of concerns and questions needed to ask. Mary Wictor, 1504 Boylan Rd, Bozeman, MT 59715 Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 1 Dear City Commission re: Canyon Gate (C.G. or CG) ~ App 22264 ~ Preliminary Plat 4/16/2023 – QUESTIONS to ask & Add/Make Conditions of Approval that are required. For this project TUE April 18, 2023, first the Staff report & 10-min Applicant presentation, then there is real time / opportunity for you, the City Commission to ASK QUESTIONS. Public Comments are well-researched are worthy of being considered, plus really used! Valid concerns/issues have been raised about traffic/circulation, low walkability score, & flooding/drainage for this intended Story Mill District large commercial/residential “node”. CDB voted suggesting Applicant/Developer meet with neighbor areas/adjacent lands—it is vital that the City Commission bring up points and that you ask questions to which the Applicant’s / developer team of resources can & should respond openly in public. Then as part of making motions and amendments, I ask you include Conditions of/for Approval herein to help address issues & concerns towards successful development. c.1970 antique photo: Aerial View looks NW to Bridger Drive/Hwy 86. [N. field = Legends II] FACTs & Looking at the LAND leads to Questions to ask: 1970 photo shows groves of Cottonwood Trees & Aspen Trees stand (growing in natural swales) showing where it is wet; farming wisely avoided clearing swales back to 1860s! Tree Groves [Canyon Gate]  West flowing, overflowing  ~ Bridger Creek Westward, Natural swales with some gravels due to historic flows/overflows Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 2 Plats for LegendsI & LegendsII, on N/NE sides, state DUE TO HIGH GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS, FULL OR PARTIAL BASEMENTS ARE NOT RECOMMENDED. High Groundwater/GW: Applicant measured 6.44ft to 13ft; when graded expects 10ft Q1) Since Cottonwood/Aspen trees use/suck up water, if trees/swales are not saved, won’t removal of 110+ large trees increase the groundwater level to be even higher? Q2) This whole area has only one- and two-story buildings historically and presently, foundations have thus not needed to be dug very deep (most likely only 3-4 feet deep); How will tall buildings (up to 50ft or 4 stories in height, whichever is greater) be built with the groundwater being so high here? + How deep will the digging go--what is expected? [4 stories X-feet deep? 3-stories 6-7ft deep, MT frostline depth 61in… GW separation?] Q3) As Canyon Gate is W-S-SW adjacent to many County parcels each having a well for drinking water & an individual septic system to treat their wastewater, How will C.G. development provide Water Quality treatment & stormwater/drainage to NOT impact so many existing water wells (plus, the aquifer), septic systems + avoid flooding impacts? Still in County--multitude of green circles = septics & black square dots = drinking water wells Q4) There are three (3) WET Utilities--Water, Sewer, & Stormwater/Drainage. Applicant Civil Engineer noted “pipes” will be used to transport Stormdrainage—Show 19 locations+pipes? Isn’t that a LARGE NUMBER of stormwater Vaults? How works with roads & open spaces? Can combining some stormwater vaults add more flood capacity + reduce maintenance/$’s? Applicant Civil Engineer said there was more creek depth than modeling used, but Public Comment stated that due to flows, floods, and beavers, massive SEDIMENTATION exists. Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 3 -NO recent FEMA flood data (1980s/’82 exists) with updates only planned starting in 2025+. Public Comment stated only some flooding issues via Bridger Creek from beaver activities. Plus, weather changes are happening + Climate Change impacts will increase need to plan and handle changes in volume, storm intensity & frequency, snow piles, melting, runoff, etc. Q5) Prelim. Plat must show where roads & drainage will go—it’s not really changeable later. -Code and regulations typically apply like a “cook book” recipe, but are ONLY MINIMUMS! -Water is a force of nature—flooding can be hazardous, disastrous, & costly—must avoid! How can C.G. engineering today model/accommodate stormwater management/drainage, plus future potential for flooding, overflows, without impacting adjacent Lands/Legends or downgradient areas or outfall/flow to properties. Use % (133%, 180%, etc.), other things? During ComDevBoard 4/3/2023, newer Board Member Jason Delmue read part of this code: Sec. 38.410.010. - General standards. [underlining added for emphasis] A. Conformance. The design and development of all land uses must conform to this chapter, adopted growth policies, any relevant adopted neighborhood or subarea plan… B. Natural environment. The design and development of all land uses must be properly related to topography, and must, to the extent possible, preserve the natural terrain, natural drainage, existing topsoil, trees and other existing vegetation. C. Lands unsuitable for development. Land which the city has found to be unsuitable for development because of potential hazards such as flooding, … high water table; or because of unreasonable burdens on the general public… or congestion in the streets or roads must not be used for building or residential purposes unless the hazards or excessive public burdens are eliminated or will be overcome by appropriate design and construction plans… [italics emphasis] The purpose of reviews at Preliminary Plat is to ask & hash out these concerns. It has NOT been shown by the developer it’s technically figured out + code minimums are NOT enough! Two Conditions of Approval / Add amendments: i. Developer/applicant shall either get or determine more real/current flood data, or provide suitable engineering analysis / design to eliminate and/or overcome flooding & high water table (groundwater)—to avoid impacts to owners/residents, shoppers or visitors to “node”. ii. It’s April 2023--traffic studies need multi-day, re-collect/re-run to get data during when school is actually in session, PLUS during summer to better provide & reflect actual uses. Q6) How handle when Bridger Creek really may flood? (Historic farm field Legends II has natural swales and gravelly places indicating that there have been times of flows with above ground flows. Legends II green stormwater design reflects this; design of open spaces kept natural swales to allow flows heading west to do so—those can and will continue to/through the Canyon Gate parcel. Groundwater is high and underground flows head westward, too. Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 4 Flood Hazards [1980s] exist/persist/will increase; FEMA updates→2025+ & Climate Change! Legends II green stormwater design Open Spaces can carry high flows from Bridger Creek By direct observation noted ponding/frozen small lakes 1971-1980 where blue circles drawn  Existing barrow pit ditches with culverts existing under driveways and/or road crossings. Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 5 REQUIRE CONNECTIVITY ~ plus ensure good planning/access… Water, Sewer, Storm. FACTs ~ Some Background on the Roads and Wet Utilities Legends I extended Boylan Road east & added Spirit Crossing Lane on North edge of C.G. Legends II added Maiden Spirit St. near West edge of Canyon Gate (C.G.); Additionally… Legends II extended Boylan Rd east to/thru Creekwood & added Northview St to Bridger Dr. There’s a ½ street “Alley” in Legends II, N-adjacent to the backside of Lots on Bridger Drive: Water & Sewer mains located here via development can & do provide service to Bridger Dr. Individual Lots on Bridger Drive have already started to annex as their septic ages or fails. Bridger Dr. home/lot owners can upzone from R-S to R-1/R-2 to allow/added homes/ADUs. These home/landowners must allocate North 30-feet of their Lot(s) for Alley ROW to be 60ft! Eventually, over time, this 30ft Alley will need to become a full 60ft-wide ROW named street. Legends developments, zoned R-3 & R-1, had made purchases of additional land to ensure access and create viable subdivisions per Gallatin County officials and Bozeman Planning. Canyon Gate, zoned R-3, R-5, REMU, and B2-M… potentially 470 dwellings, 2x population! ➔ Layout/design of Canyon Gate should be required to have same/similar elements. Q7) Does Canyon Gate Blvd design on South allow Bridger Dr. homes/lots connect W&S? Water = blue, Sewer = dark green, Stormwater/drainage = lime green; - - - pink is City Limits Water & Sewer? Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 6 ACCESS and Road/Street Connectivity. Sec. 38.300.110. - Commercial and mixed-use zoning districts—intent and purpose. C. Community business district-mixed (B-2M). … Design standards emphasizing pedestrian oriented design are important elements of this district. Use of this zone is appropriate for arterial corridors, commercial nodes and/or areas served by transit. Q8) How does Preliminary Plat ACCESS design serve B2-M Commercial areas now/future? How will traffic access driving from Bozeman, and Bridger Canyon. How use accesses within the local area to drive or ensure walk, bike, and micromobility (e-skateboards)? Q9) Why is there NO access to Arterial (Hwy 86/Bridger Dr.) especially for commercial? B-2M zoning, especially commercial, needs primary access by Arterial—Bridger Dr./Hwy 86. >Add Condition of Approval to require CG to continue seeking MDT approval until achieved. Internal roads for Canyon Gate appear to be to 35-foot street standards Q10) Why is the Application to MDT only for a 26-foot wide access to Arterial? Ask Questions Add Conditions of Approval to address concerns/issues Page 7 Q11) Why is the MAIN entrance off collector Story Mill Road only the standard road size? Won’t most (perhaps 80%) of the traffic enter/exit here? Shouldn’t entrance be wider? >>Perhaps marquis, etc. to properly serve the commercial, residential, and community. [As asked at the CDB/Planning Board by C. Egnatz] Q12) How will transit occur in the future, as walk score is low 30 (vs 48 average/Bozeman)? Where are pedestrian crossings going to implemented to all and encourage safe walking? Q13) Where can a bus pull out, stop to load/unload people & equipment, then pull back and/or turn around? BUS SERVICE WILL BE NEEDED one day—sooner than later. Plan ahead and ensure there is space—make NOW any needed changes to roads or access. Q14) Where do people visiting Canyon Gate park? Would parking on Canyon Gate Blvd be problematic due to limited site-distance on curves? Q15) What City of Bozeman plans or revisions will there be for fire stations & emergencies in this area? Local Street Connections – definitely need Traffic Calming measures / vehicles go slowly. Q16) Glad to see short curvilinear road connections to Maiden Spirit & Northview Streets (really must be required). How much will the curves illustrated physically require vehicles to slow down (e.g., to 15mph via physical vertical curbs, radius of curve yet allow snowplows?) What can be done to slow and reduce traffic to the Sprit Crossing local road connection which is "straight"? Q17) The road connection from Canyon Gate to Northview St to Bridger Drive is critical. Will the developer continue to pursue this via Legends II HOA appropriate as it is needed? Can City Commission strongly support the need for this connection for success and good of all? Q18) Snow removal responsibility is to be assigned, but Where will snow storage be allowed, as it will certainly be needed—and this winter Oct-Apr is a reminder of that?