Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22389 Staff Report MSP - REVISED NOTICE FINAL Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 1 of 25 Application No. 22389 Type Site Plan Project Name Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Summary Apartment development for four lots in Block 14 of Gran Cielo Subdivision Phase 2. Each lot is proposed to be developed with either a 29-unit or a 50-unit apartment building in four phases with associated open space, parking, landscaping and site improvements. The purpose of the master site plan is to coordinate phasing and construction management with required on and off-site improvements, general building and site design, and review required easements, open space, parking, and parkland. *After the public comment period closed and the application was approved, the City discovered that not all property owners within 200-feet of the subject property received adequate notice of the development application. An additional notice period was conducted to allow all property owners within 200-feet of the subject property an opportunity to provide public comment pursuant to the Bozeman Municipal Code. No changes to the application have been made by the applicant since the previous public comment period. After consideration of additional public comments, staff recommends that the previous approval of the development not be altered or rescinded. Staff finds the development application remains sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions. Zoning R-5 Growth Policy Urban Neighborhood Parcel Size Total of 4 lots is 6.69 Acres, the lots range from 1.33-2.05 Acres each. Overlay District(s) None Street Address TBD, Apex Drive, South 19th Avenue, and South 27th Avenue Legal Description Gran Cielo Sub Phase 2, S23, T02 S, R05 E, Block 14, Lots 1-4, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana Owner Bozeman Haus LLC, 15267 SE Rivershore Drive, Vancouver, WA 98683 Applicant Same as Owner Representative Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd, Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 Staff Planner Danielle Garber Engineer Simon Lindley Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Newspaper Legal Ad Original Dates 11/06/2023 to 11/30/2023 Revised Dates 8/13/2024 to 9/4/2024 Original Date 11/06/2023 Revised Date 8/13/2024 Original Date 11/06/2023 Revised Date 8/13/24 N/A Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee 11/01/2023 The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions Recommendation The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date: 10/11/24 Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 Digital application access: https://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=276280&dbid=0&repo=BOZEMAN Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 2 of 25 FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPEAL PROVISIONS CERTIFICATE A) PURSUANT to Chapter 38, Article 2, Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC), and other applicable sections of Ch.38, BMC, public notice was given, opportunity to submit comment was provided to affected parties, and a review of the Site Plan described in this report was conducted. The applicant proposed to the City a Master Site Plan (MSP) to permit an apartment development for four lots in Block 14 of Gran Cielo Subdivision Phase 2 and associated site improvements. The purposes of the Site Plan review were to consider all relevant evidence relating to public health, safety, welfare, and the other purposes of Ch. 38, BMC; to evaluate the proposal against the criteria of Sec. 38.230.100 BMC, and the standards of Ch. 38, BMC; and to determine whether the application should be approved, conditionally approved, or denied. B) It appeared to the Director that all parties and the public wishing to examine the proposed Site Plan and offer comment were provided the opportunity to do so. After receiving the recommendation of the relevant advisory bodies established by Ch. 38, Art. 210, BMC, and considering all matters of record presented with the application and during the public comment period defined by Ch. 38, BMC, the Director has found that the proposed Site Plan would comply with the requirements of the BMC if certain conditions were imposed. Therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before them regarding this application, the Director makes the following decision. C) The Site Plan has been found to meet the criteria of Ch. 38, BMC, and is therefore approved, subject to the conditions listed in this report and the correction of any elements not in conformance with the standards of the Title. The evidence contained in the submittal materials, advisory body review, public testimony, and this report, justifies the conditions imposed on this development to ensure that the Site Plan complies with all applicable regulations, and all applicable criteria of Ch. 38, BMC. On this _23rd_ day of __October__, 2024, Erin George, Interim Director of Community Development, or her designee approved with conditions this Site Plan for and on behalf of the City of Bozeman as authorized by Sec. 38.200.010, BMC. D) This Director of Community Development’s project decision may be appealed by filing a documented appeal with and paying an appeal fee to the Clerk of the Commission for the City of Bozeman within 10 working days after the date of the final decision as evidenced by the Director’s signature, following the procedures of Sec. 38.250.030, BMC. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR DESIGNEE Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 3 of 25 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 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. CODE PROVISIONS 1. DSSP II. B. Storm Drainage Plan. Prior to occupancy of any phase of the Gran Cielo Block 14 master site plan, the Property Owners’ Association stormwater facilities must be rehabilitated to the capacity stated in the applicant's storm water design report. The rehabilitation must be to the satisfaction of the City of Bozeman Storm Water Department. 2. BMC 38.270.030.C-D – Exception for concurrent construction. In certain circumstances, the issuance of a building permit may be allowed prior to completion of the public infrastructure, provided that the criteria listed in this section are met. Provide concurrent construction approval prior to building permit approval of any phase. Approval requires a concurrent construction request plan approval, an irrevocable offer of dedication, infrastructure review and approval, submittal of original executed easements to facility infrastructure, and fire review and approval. 3. BMC 38.270.030. Pedestrian Corridors. The mid-block crossing sidewalks and landscaping were financially guaranteed by the Phase 2 subdivision. These pedestrian corridors are considered public infrastructure in-lieu of streets and must be completed and/or financially guaranteed with the concurrent construction application prior to occupancy of Phase 1. 4. BMC 38.520.070. Mechanical equipment screening. Prior to final plan approval for each phase, update the elevation drawings and material palette sheet to include the rooftop mechanical equipment screen wall materials. 5. BMC 38.530.060. Building Materials. Metal siding must be a minimum 24-gauge thickness. Where 26-gauge siding is proposed that must be replaced with a thicker gauge prior to final plan approval of each phase. 6. BMC 38.410.130. Water Adequacy: The preliminary cash-in-lieu of water rights (CILWR) fee for the project is $127,395 including irrigation demand. CILWR must be paid prior to final plan approval for each phase. a. If the irrigation demand will be supplied by a groundwater well then the irrigation demand can be excluded from the fee. A preliminary determination from the DNRC is required to confirm that a groundwater well is allowed must be submitted with this application prior to finalizing the fee if this option is selected. ADVISORY COMMENTS 1. The applicant is advised that the area located to the south of the subject property consists primarily of residential uses and great care should be taken to reduce construction impacts to adjacent residents. The applicant is required to adhere to any approved construction management plans during the course of the building and infrastructure construction processes and must mitigate any negative impacts on the adjacent property owners including dust, drainage, noise, lighting, contractor parking, and staging. 2. The City would like to make the owner aware of an available CILWR rebate of approximately 20% for residential units, released at occupancy, if high-efficiency fixtures (toilets, washers, and shower heads) are installed. A rebate agreement template outlining the terms of the rebate offer has been provided. If the owner is interested please update the agreement using track changes with the owner information and send the word document to Griffin Nielsen at gnielsen@bozeman.net. If there are any questions about the agreement, please reach out over email. The agreement should be finalized prior to final plan approval of any phase. Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 4 of 25 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 5 of 25 Figure 1a: Current Zoning Map (Updated) Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 6 of 25 Figure 2: Phasing Plan Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 7 of 25 Figure 3: Site Plan Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 8 of 25 Figure 4: Landscaping Plan Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 9 of 25 Figure 5: Elevation 29-Plex (Two Buildings) Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 10 of 25 Figure 6: Elevation 50-Plex (Two Buildings) Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 11 of 25 Figure 7: 3D Views 29-Plex Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 12 of 25 Figure 8: 3D Views 50-Plex Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 13 of 25 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. Plan Review, Section 38.230.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the Director of Community Development shall consider the following: 1. Conformance with Article 1 - Consistency with the City’s adopted Growth Policy 38.100.040.D Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Urban Neighborhood Yes Zoning R-5, Residential Mixed-Use High Density District Yes Comments: The project conforms to the requirements of the R-5 zoning district. The 2020 Community Plan designation of Urban Neighborhood correlates with the R-5 zoning district. The proposed project conforms to this designation by providing urban density homes within city limits in proximity to existing and developing parks, commercial nodes, and schools. 2. Conformance with Article 1 - All other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.100.080) Condominium ownership NA Comments: Additional steps will be required including but not limited to review of a site plan for each phase, building permits, and infrastructure plans. The Building Division of the Department of Community Development will review the requirements of the International Building Code for compliance at the time of building permit application following approval of each subsequent site plan. The entitlement period sought for the overall master site plan is 5-years. 3. Conformance with Article 2, including the cessation of any current violations (38.200.160) Meets Code? Current Violations None Yes Comments: There are no current violations on the property. 4. Conformance with Article 2 - Submittal material (38.220) requirements and plan review for applicable permit types (38.230) Meets Code? Site Plan Yes Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: 4 Yes Comments: When considering the plan review criteria under BMC 38.230.100, the code allows evaluation of master site plans to be “a more generalized demonstration of compliance, recognizing that a subsequent site plan will be submitted in the future which will provide evidence of specific compliance.” Figure 2 of this report shows the proposed phasing. Each phase of this proposed development represents subsequent review of an individual site plan application as currently proposed. Phase 1 at the NW corner of the site is currently in review under application 22391. Each platted lot is proposed as an individual phase within the master site plan, containing a single building and a portion of the shared parking, open space, and other site improvements. Per code provision 3, the applicant must construct the walkways and landscaping in two 30-foot mid-block pedestrian paths that run north-south and east-west through the site, or financially guarantee portions according to proposed phasing prior to occupancy. The Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 14 of 25 applicant has proposed to construct the east-west sidewalk and landscaping, and the north end of the north-south walkway with phase 1. Per code provision 5 CILWR must be paid prior to final site plan approval for each phase. With phase 1, public infrastructure including water and sewer mains, hardscape, and perimeter sidewalks are proposed to be constructed. Special use Permit 38.230.120 NA Comments: No special uses are proposed. 5. Conformance with Article 3 - Zoning Provisions (38.300) Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Apartment Buildings Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: R-5 Setbacks (feet) Structures Parking / Loading Yes Front Block Frontage / 15 NA Rear 20 NA Side 5 NA Alley NA NA Comments: Multi-household buildings are subject to block frontage standards. All street frontages are designated landscaped frontages with a minimum 10-foot setback. R-5 zoning requires a 15-foot setback with an allowable 5-foot encroachment for porches and patios. The buildings are proposed over 15-feet from the front property line with no encroachments. Rear and side setbacks are not applicable with shared access drives and parking across the 4 lots. No buildings are proposed within 5-feet of the north-south and east-west public access easements used for block length mitigation. Lot coverage 16%, all 4 lots Allowed No maximum Yes Building height 55-feet 8-inches both building types Allowed 60-Feet Yes Comments: Building heights for both the 29-unit and 50-unit buildings are 55’ 8” from grade, with varying roof pitches including 7:12 at the maximum ridge. Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-40 NA Comments: NA, the proposed project is not subject to zone specific or overlay district standards. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: No setback encroachments are proposed. Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 NA Supplemental uses/type NA NA Comments: NA, the proposed projects is not subject to any supplemental use criteria. Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 NA Affordable housing plan NA Comments: No wireless facilities are proposed. No affordable housing incentives are requested. 6a. Conformance with Article 4 - Community Design Provisions: Transportation Facilities and Access (38.400) Meets Code? Streets 38.400.010 Yes Street and road dedication 38.400.020 NA Access easements Yes Level of Service 38.400.060 Yes Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 15 of 25 Comments: Adjacent streets exist to serve the site, no additional dedication is needed. No new traffic impact study was required by the Engineering Division however, a peak-hour trip generation letter was provided by the Applicant to ensure that the proposed project would not exceed the original assumed trip estimates reviewed with the subdivision. Email correspondence in the project file demonstrates that the trip generation from the proposed project will not exceed the anticipated impact identified in the original subdivision. Level of service standards for arterial and collector streets serving the site was evaluated by engineering. A supplemental report was also provided to engineering detailing traffic impacts to the S. 27th Avenue and Stucky Road intersection and concluding that no additional turn lane was necessary at this time. A Waiver of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for future transportation improvements is a required condition that has been provided for the Gran Cielo Subdivision ensuring participation in funding of future infrastructure improvements that may be required to offset impacts created by development of the property. Sidewalks 38.400.080 Yes Comments: Sidewalks are to be provided along the primary street frontages. The midblock crossing sidewalks and landscaping must be completed with phase 1 or be financially guaranteed as indicated in the phasing discussion above. Drive access 38.400.090 Access to site: 2 Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: Two drive accesses are proposed, one from Apex Drive and one from S. 29th Avenue; engineering evaluated both drive accesses for spacing and design standards. Both drive accesses are proposed to be constructed with Phase 1. Street vision triangle 38.400.100 Yes Transportation pathways 38.400.110 Yes Pedestrian access easements for shared use pathways and similar transportation facilities Yes Public transportation 38.400.120 NA Comments: No new pedestrian easements are proposed with this project. The access easements platted with the subdivision to mitigate block length are required to be constructed with Phase 1 or be financially guaranteed. 6b. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Community Design and Elements (38.410) Meets Code? Neighborhood centers 38.410.020 NA Comments: This project does not trigger neighborhood center requirements. Lot and block standards 38.410.030-040 NA Midblock crossing: rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation Yes Comments: See discussion in 6a above. If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area NA Provisions for utilities including efficient public services and utilities 38.410.050-060 Yes Easements (City and public utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes Water, sewer, and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes CIL of water Yes Comments: Design reports certified by a professional engineer in the state of Montana were reviewed by engineering for utilities and infrastructure. CIL of water rights is required prior to final plan approval for each phased site plan. Easements have been provided for utilities. Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 16 of 25 Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 Yes Comments: Municipal water, sanitary sewer, and storm sewer systems proposed with this project have been reviewed by engineering for compliance with adopted standards. Grading & drainage 38.410.080 Yes Location, design and capacity of stormwater facilities Yes Stormwater maintenance plan Yes Landscaping: native species, curvilinear, 75% live vegetation 38.410.080.H Yes Comments: The location, design, and capacity of existing and proposed stormwater facilities were reviewed by engineering. The overall grading and drainage plan for the four proposed phases is located on sheet C1.2. Runoff rates and storage capacity of the detention pond at the northwest corner of Lot 1 was evaluated by engineering and found to meet standards and design specifications. This facility is required to be landscaped by the subdivider. Code provision 1 requires that prior to occupancy of any phase of the Gran Cielo Block 14 master site plan, the property owners’ association stormwater facilties must be rehabilitated to the capacity stated in the applicant's stormwater design report. The rehabilitation must be to the satisfaction of the City of Bozeman Storm Water Department. Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan 38.410.100.2.f NA 6c. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Park and Recreation Requirements (38.420) Meets Code? Parkland requirements 38.420.020.A NA Yes Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 NA Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: No additional parkland is required with this development. The four lots have existing parkland credits from the Gran Cielo Subdivision. Park Frontage 38.420.060 NA Park development 38.420.080 NA Recreation pathways 38.420.110 NA Park/Recreational area design NA Comments: This location (Block 14 of Gran Cielo) received preliminary plat approval under application 17-522 and a revised preliminary plat application was approved under application number 19-219. The revised application removed a park that was originally approved for Block 14 and proposed instead to provide additional improvements-in-lieu to the central park located within Phase 1. Multi-household development for Block 14 was anticipated and additional improvements-in-lieu of parkland for this block were provided at Gran Cielo Park. The required parkland calculation provided with this application with the known density of development of the 4 lots was evaluated by the Parks Planner, and the existing credits provided by the subdivision were sufficient to cover the parkland requirements for this development. No parks are proposed with this application. Public parks exist directly to the south and east that can be accessed via sidewalks including Gran Cielo Park, Meadow Creek Park, and Enterprise Park. 7a. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Block Frontage Standards (38.510) Meets Code? Block frontage classification Landscaped & Special Residential Yes Departure criteria None requested NA Comments: This proposed project is meeting the landscaped block frontage standards for all four street frontages including building placement, building entrances, façade transparency, weather protection, and Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 17 of 25 parking location. The buildings are placed 15-feet from the property line, meeting the 10-foot setback requirement. The street elevations of the 29-unit buildings are meeting the façade transparency requirements by providing 24.8% of transparency over the entire façade with 15% required for residential uses, and the 50-unit buildings are meeting this standard by providing 31.2% transparency. Landscaped block frontage requires building entrances be visible and directly accessible from the street. The applicant is meeting this standard by providing individual pedestrian connections to each ground level unit entrance lining all four street frontages, as well as to the shared entrances. These entrances are covered patios with weather protection exceeding the minimum 3-foot depth requirement. The parking location requirements for Landscaped Block Frontage require that private parking areas make up no more than 50% of the street frontage. The applicant is meeting this requirement by providing parking along less than approximately 30% of the Bennett Blvd frontage, less than 15% of the S. 29th Ave. and Apex Drive frontages, and around 29% of the S. 27th Ave frontage. There is also a significant buffer of open space area between S. 27th Avenue and the parking and circulation areas. Generally, parking is located at the interior of the site and meets this block frontage standard. Where parking is visible from the street, landscape screening is required and proposed to be provided per BMC 38.550.050. The applicant is also providing a 10-foot landscaped setback between ground level living spaces and interior walkways meeting the front setback option in 38.510.030.J.2 for the Special Residential block frontage located along interior sidewalks and pathways. This standard is required to address buffer requirements between private residential spaces, shared parking, and circulation interior to the site. 7b. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520) Meets Code? Design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes Relationship to adjacent properties 38.520.030 NA Non-motorized circulation and design systems to enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including, but not limited to paving patterns, pathway design, landscaping and lighting 38.420.040 Yes Comments: Interior sidewalks are proposed along the perimeters and through parking areas that will allow for direct access to an open space area and trash enclosures. All interior frontages of buildings are proposed with pedestrian facilities that connect throughout the site and to the public sidewalk network. The application is meeting code requirements in this section for sidewalk design including properly marked crosswalks, pedestrian paths through parking lots, and pathway design with adjacent landscaping near buildings. Design of vehicular circulation systems to assure that vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site and between properties and activities within the general community 38.420.050 Yes Internal roadway design 38.520.050.D NA Comments: NA On-site open space 38.520.060 Total required 15,764 square feet Yes Total provided 17,970 square feet Yes Comments: The application exceeds minimum open space requirements. Shared open space located in lots 2 and 3 totals 17,970 square feet and makes up the bulk of the provided usable open space. The amenities in the shared open space consist of a fenced dog play area, seating, charcoal BBQ grills, and landscaping. Additional open space not included in the provided total is also designed at each building entrance, as patios and balconies, and interior to the buildings as gym and lounge space. Small plazas located at each of the four building entrances are proposed with covered bike parking, fire pits, and Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 18 of 25 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 Yes Yes Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 245 spaces Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b None proposed Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 NA Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c NA Provided off-street 215 spaces Provided on-street 46 on-street available Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 24 req., 30 provided Comments: A parking calculation for the overall development is provided on the coversheet. Parking is proposed within a shared surface parking lot. Each stall provided off-street meets the stall, aisle, and driveway design requirements of Section 38.540.020. On-street parking provides a residential reduction of 46 spaces. Bike parking will be provided at racks adjacent to each proposed building with inverted U racks. Bicycle parking areas meet the length and width dimensions for each stall and utilize the sidewalk to meet circulation requirements. Loading and uploading area requirements 38.540.080 NA First berth – minimum 70 feet length, 12 feet in width, 14 feet in height NA Additional berth – minimum 45 feet length NA Comments: NA 7e. Conformance with Article 5 – Landscaping (38.550) Meets Code? Mandatory landscaping requirements 38.550.050 Yes Drought tolerant species 75% required Yes Parking lot landscaping Yes Additional screening NA Street frontage Yes seating and planter boxes for separation from parking and circulation areas. Balconies and patios also serve as private open space accessible form each unit. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: Heat pumps are proposed in the wall on each unit’s patio. For this reason, the patios and balconies are not counted towards the required open space calculation. Mechanical equipment is also proposed on the roof of each building. Code provision 4 requires the applicant to identify materials used to screen rooftop equipment prior to final plan approval of each phase. Meters are to be screened by landscaping, primarily juniper plantings. Solid waste will be collected via shared dumpsters within a covered solid waste enclosure and landscaping that meets the requirements of this section. 7c. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Building Design (38.530) Meets Code? Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development 38.530.030 Yes Building massing and articulation 38.530.040 Yes Building details, materials, and blank wall treatments 38.530.050-070 Yes Comments: The apartment buildings are meeting the building design standards of this section including articulation, materials, and details. Changes in roofline, materials, and windows/patios are used for articulation. Primary building materials include 26 Ga. Corrugated metal, horizontal James Hardie lap and board and batten siding, Topcoat durable exterior cladding in a natural wood finish, and asphalt roofing. Code provision 5 requires the 26 gauge metal siding to be replaced with a thicker gauge prior to final plan approval of each phase. Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 19 of 25 Street median island NA Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas NA Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Residential adjacency NA Comments: The provided landscaping plan conforms to standards. Landscaping of public lands 38.550.070 Yes Comments: Street trees will be provided along the four street frontages and within each pedestrian easement to mitigate block length. 7f. Conformance with Article 5 – Signs (38.560) Meets Code? Allowed SF/building 38.560.060 NA NA Proposed SF/building NA NA Comments: No residential complex identification signs are approved with this application. Separate sign permits meeting the requirements of this code section are required prior to the installation of any signs. 7g. Conformance with Article 5 – Lighting (38.560) Meets Code? Site lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040 NA Building-mounted lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040.B Yes Comments: Site lighting is proposed at building entrances and patios, underneath covered parking roofs, and along pedestrian paths and walkways. All lighting conforms to cutoff and intensity standards. Footcandles do not exceed maximums at the property lines for residential and public street adjacency. 8. Conformance with Article 6 – Natural Resource Protection Meets Code? Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: NA 9. Relevant Comment from Affected Parties (38.220) Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Comments: A public notice period was conducted and is detailed on page 1 of this report. A revised public notice period meeting the requirements of this section was further conducted and is also detailed on page 1. The following public comments were provided as summarized below.  A. Lex 11-21-23. Concerns about the placement of trash and recycling, R-5 zoning and commercial uses, lack of cohesion with the surrounding community (compatibility).  B. Warner 11-30-23. Concerns about R-5 zoning and commercial uses, parking concerns, compliance with property owners’ association documents, and placement of trash and recycling.  M. Revelle & S. Hall 8-20-24. Concerns about traffic and a lack of a commercial use component to the development.  J. Darr 8-24-24. Concerned that the public notice sign was no longer on the property.  L. Wolfe 8-24-24. Concerns about loss of views and property values. Concerns about traffic, on-street parking, building height, and R-5 zoning and this development only containing residential uses.  A. Lex. 8-27-24. Concerns about the placement of trash and recycling being visible from their property, R-5 zoning and this development not containing commercial uses, building height and the location of surface parking.  M. and P. Swarchuk 8-29-24. Concerns about: o The required parking calculation and impacts to on street parking nearby including subdivision covenants. Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 20 of 25 o Concerns about landscaping of the detention pond and Bennett and S. 29th and additional runoff. o Concerns about traffic around Stucky Lane. o Building height. o Construction management and on-street parking during construction.  B. Warner 8-27-24. Concerns about R-5 zoning and this development not containing commercial uses. Concerns about the placement of trash and recycling being visible from their property and concerns about traffic. Density concerns and assurances made by realtors and the developer.  M. Revelle Additional Comments 8-28-24. Concerns about building height and neighborhood compatibility, would prefer three stories. Concerns about the units being rented.  C. Coleman 9-3-24. Concerns about traffic on Stucky Road, not enough available parkland and active transportation infrastructure in the area based on the PRAT plan and dangers to cyclists on Stucky. Residents already parking in bike lanes and mismanagement of parking by the developer.  E. Darr 9-3-24. Concerns about the character of the neighborhood and strain on existing amenities, potential parking and traffic issues.  J. Darr 9-3-24. Concerns about property values, specifically “the construction of apartment buildings in close proximity to high-end homes.” Concerns about R-5 zoning and this development not containing commercial uses. Concerns about traffic, parking, and safety, as well as neighborhood character and the planned 4-story heights of the buildings.  J. & C. Killian 9-3-24. Concerns about property values due to the proximity of apartments, as well as on-street parking and traffic in relation to their kids exploring the neighborhood on bikes.  P. Lopez 9-3-24. Concerns about R-5 zoning and this development not containing commercial uses. Building additional housing does not equate to affordable housing, this developer should be required to provide affordable housing.  E. Davis 9-3-24. General comment about the level of development in Bozeman does not support the development on 27th and Graf. No specifics given referencing this site plan application, staff is unclear if this comment is referring to application 22389 or just the Gran Cielo subdivision in general.  J. Lorraine 9-3-24. Opposes the development.  K. Haggerty 9-3-24. Comments cited list issues with management of stormwater ponds, irrigation ditches, and groundwater for the general area and Gran Cielo development.  S. Krezminski 9-3-24. Comments opposing dense development, concerns about traffic and use of an outdated traffic impact study. Mentions Buffalo Run zoning and development nearby.  C. Dublois 9-4-24. Concerns about building height and “overall scope of the project.”  D. Tracy 9-4-24. Concerns about community character, growth, and density.  E. Sadera 9-4-24. The community does not need more high density housing in the immediate area of Gran Cielo, lists development at Kagy and 19th, Graf and 19th, Blackwood Grove, and the area around Graf and 27th.  H. Wright 9-4-24. Opposes the high-density apartments due to increased traffic on Stucky and nearby streets.  K. Beach 9-4-24. Opposes all high-density housing projects. Mentions the Affordable Housing Ordinance. Cites increased traffic, parking, community aesthetic, and spoiled views.  S. Paine 9-4-24. Opposed to this proposed development. States public notice was not handled properly. Cites concerns about building height, community compatibility based on height, adequate parking, traffic, and property values.  T and D. Hughes 9-4-24. Concerns about parking, traffic, community character, home values, and the development “violating the intended zoning of R-5.”  T. Sadera 9-4-24. Concerns about the development contributing to traffic congestion in tandem with other high-density development nearby.  M. and P. Swarchuk 9-4-24. Resubmitted comments listed above. Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 21 of 25  S. Martin 9-4-24. Cited three concerns about the development: Negative impact to home values, increase in traffic and dangers to kids playing in streets and on-street parking, and low water pressure for current residents. Not all comments represent criteria within the development code that staff reviews when determining if a project meets, or meets with conditions and code provisions, the requirements of Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC). Below is a list of criteria cited in the above public comment staff may utilize when providing a recommendation of approval for a site plan application:  Public notice BMC 38.220.400. This section of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) contains notice requirements for application processing. For preliminary site plan and master site plan applications a notice must be posted on site and mailed first class to all property owners within 200-feet of the exterior boundary of the subject property. The initial public notice period of November 6 to November 30, 2023 was conducted prior to the initial approval of this proposed master site plan. As detailed on page 1 of this report, staff was made aware that not all property owners within 200-feet of the subject property received adequate notice of the development application. This additional notice period was conducted to allow all property owners within 200-feet of the subject property an opportunity to provide public comment pursuant to the Bozeman Municipal Code. No changes to the application have been made by the applicant since the previous public comment period. A comment by J. Darr received 8-24-24 stated that the public notice sign was no longer on the property. The applicant was notified by staff via phone and a new notice board was installed on 8-27-24. The applicant stated that the notice board had been removed by an unknown party since it appeared that the posts holding up the board were tampered with. BMC 38.220.420.B states “If for some reason a required property owner fails to receive mail notification of a scheduled public hearing or other public comment opportunity, or if one or more of the required posted signs in the area or on the site for which the public hearing or other public comment opportunity is being held is inadvertently moved through no fault of the city, this in no way invalidates the legal notice requirements of the scheduled public hearing or other public comment opportunity.”  Traffic impacts. Traffic impacts were mentioned by several commenters, specifically the intersection with Stucky Road and S. 27th Avenue. The impact of the proposal on existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions is a required criteria of BMC 38.230.100.A.6.a(2). A traffic impact study (TIS) prepared by Marvin & Associates in 2017 by a professional engineer registered in the state of Montana was submitted with the original Gran Cielo site plan application. This report is located in the application documents in the online materials under document 007. Correspondence with the reviewing engineer regarding traffic impacts is also online under document 008. Per this correspondence, the City’s Transportation Engineer determined that the traffic impact identified with this proposed development is within the impact anticipated by the original subdivision. The land under the Gran Cielo Subdivision was annexed into the City of Bozeman in 2007 with an initial zoning district designation of R-4. This location (Block 14 of Gran Cielo) received preliminary plat approval under applications 17-522 and a revised preliminary plat application was approved under application number 19-219. Multi-household development for Block 14 was anticipated and reviewed with the subdivision applications and included in the engineering and traffic reports. Following infrastructure construction, this area received final plat approval on September 27, 2022. In 2021, a zone map amendment was submitted for Block 14 under application number 21-095 requesting R-5 zoning. The staff report for the R-5 zone map amendment considered the 11 criteria established by state law, and the policies for zoning review in the 2020 Bozeman Community Plan. As noted in the staff report for the zone map amendment (application no. 21095) “The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer, parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional service made necessary by new development” Demand for individual transportation services for this proposed development was identified first via the overall Gran Cielo Subdivision Traffic Impact Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 22 of 25 Study, and reviewed by the City Engineering Division for capacity. Per comments provided during the review in May of 2023, a supplemental analysis was requested by City staff to specifically evaluate if a westbound left-turn lane was warranted to mitigate traffic impacts associated with the Gran Cielo Subdivision. The analysis considered both existing and future build-out conditions of the development. The supplemental analysis was provided with the Block 14 application dated August 24, 2023. The analysis utilized industry standard practices for traffic counts and traffic volume determination to evaluate existing and future projections. Intersection capacity was evaluated per BMC standards and remained within the overall intersection level of service “C”, for both existing and future conditions. Engineering concurred with the provided values. The supplemental analysis was stamped and certified by a professional traffic engineer. City staff reviewed the updated analysis provided with the Block 14 application and agreed that a westbound left-turn lane was not warranted under existing conditions. The report indicated a westbound left-turn lane on Stucky Road would meet warrants within the next 10 years based on anticipated growth. City staff recognize that a significant amount of the traffic generated along the Stucky corridor, specifically, east-west bound traffic movements are generated from background growth in the Valley, which includes areas outside of the City limits. Recognizing these growth trends and general development patterns within the Stucky and South 27th corridors, the City’s Capital Improvement Program includes SIF191 Stucky: 19th to Fowler (CIP) to help address growth along the Stucky corridor between Fowler Lane and South 19th Ave. SIF191 is currently scheduled for fiscal years 2027-2028, which would address the warrant recommendations and general timeframe of needing a westbound left-turn lane as identified for future conditions per the analysis. Improvements would generally include building Stucky out to a City standard road section, the addition of turn lanes or other lane mitigation such as a traffic circle, multi-modal facilities, and intersection controls. Details surrounding specific roadway improvements will be formalized during the design phase. The Following initial review of this application, the area to the east of S. 27th has since been annexed into the City and zoned REMU (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use) under application 21-331. This development and future developments within the road network will be evaluated at the time of review for required improvements necessary to mitigate impacts to ensure conformance with the BMC and DSSP. Additional developments in this area currently in active review with the City are located on the Community Development Viewer map. During the course of the review process for development of these projects, staff may require improvements, or payment towards capital improvements (cash-in-lieu of infrastructure) proportional to individual impact at the time of each individual review.  Allowable uses for R-5 zoning. Several comments states that because the proposed development does not contain commercial uses, then it is therefore not meeting the allowable uses of the R-5 zoning district. R-5 zoning is a residential high-density zoning district. The table in BMC 38.310.030.A lists apartments and apartment buildings (whether rented or individually owned) are principal uses within the R-5 district. The code defines principal uses as “A use or structure which determines the predominant or major use of the lot on which it is located. The principal use is that use which establishes the character of the property relative to surrounding or adjacent properties.” The R-5 district also allows several non-residential uses under the table in BMC 8.310.030.B. Some of these non-residential uses are principal uses such as day care centers, restaurants, and retail (restaurants and retail are both size limited), parks, and public utilities. Some commercial uses may not be compatible with all residential developments, those are only permitted as special uses that require a special use permit, and those are offices, medical clinics, and large-scale public utilities (essential services Type III). Some non-residential uses in R-5 are considered accessory and those include short-term rentals, guesthouses, and home based businesses. The allowable use table does not require mixed-use development, but does provide some criteria for mixed-use development within the district including size and placement limitations on non-residential uses. There are no code requirements in this section that require an applicant to develop with both Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 23 of 25 residential and non-residential uses, a range of uses are possible based on the principal, special, and accessory uses listed in the use table linked above. Since initial submittal of this proposed master site plan, the adjacent property to the east has been annexed and zoned REMU (Residential Emphasis Mixed Use). This property is located between the subject site and the un-annexed commercial node to the east, south of Stucky Road. While not required, REMU zoning allows commercial development within 30 percent of the total gross building square footage of all uses within the master planned area. An additional area zoned B-2M (Community Business District – Mixed) is also present to the east, northwest of the corner of Stucky Road and South 19th Avenue. The City’s zoning map shows a total of five commercial or mixed-use zoning districts within a half mile of this proposed development, primarily within the Community Commercial Mixed Use growth policy designation. Within this designation in the 2020 Community Plan are community level services located at the intersections of collector and arterial streets, and neighborhood scale areas intended to provide service to the immediate half-mile to one-mile area. Densities of nearby homes needed to support this scale are an average of 14 to 22 dwellings per net acre. The gross density of the proposed development is 24.38 dwelling units/acre. As stated in the staff report for application no. 21095 “As adjacent planned commercial development occurs, the availability of walking destinations will increase.”  Compatible development. BMC 38.230100.A.7.a lists the plan review criteria for compatible development and states: “Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development relative to architectural design, building mass, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientation of buildings on the site and visual integration.” This is a review criterion of Article 5 of the development code, which governs project design code requirements including block frontage standards, site planning and design elements, building design, parking, landscaping, signs, and lighting. 7.b further states “The criteria for design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development.” The proposed master site plan is meeting the code provisions that govern compatible development in Chapter 38, Article 5 notably block frontage, which is a direct requirement of criteria 7.a, and site design, which is a direct requirement of criteria 7.b. Conformance with these criteria is discussed above in sections 7a and 7b. Furthermore, compatible development is defined in BMC 38.700.040 as “The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.” By placing the buildings and entrances along the perimeter of the development and by connecting walkways through the site and to the neighborhood circulation system, the applicant is meeting these block frontage, building, and site design standards and properly integrating the site with existing and future adjacent development. These design sections of the code also require building design to meet adopted massing and articulation and materials standards to promote architecture that is “based on human scaled design details” with “durable high quality materials.” The above standards, along with other sections of the BMC used to mitigate impacts of lighting, signage, and requirements for effective landscape screening provide criteria for compatible development.  Building height. Building height is a zoning requirement that is discussed in section 5 of this report. The proposed buildings are meeting the height requirements of R-5 zoning. The building height Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 24 of 25 proposed for both building types proposed within the site plan is 55’8” with an allowable height of 60-feet in R-5 zoning. The maximum allowable building height in R-4 zoning is 50-feet.  Screening of solid waste and ground level service areas. Section 7b contains requirements for the location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment per BMC 38.520.070. Sheet 036 in the proposed master site plan provides the architectural drawings for the solid waste enclosures. BMC requirements are met including the use of corrugated metal screening, and a horizontal roof screen to shield the service area from view from the public. This section also requires 5-feet of landscaping on all sides of the service area. The proposed landscaping plan shows the proposed plantings around the solid waste enclosures as 13 Medora Juniper with a mature height of 10-12-feet that will further screen the area. Landscaping plans for the southern service area are located on sheet 051 located in the online materials. The service area screening provided meets the architectural and landscaping screening standards required by the development code when located where they may be visible from a sidewalk and adjacent properties.  Water impacts. As noted above, the City identifies the availability of needed infrastructure at the time of site plan review based on demand identified in the engineering reports received with the application submittal. Comments were received regarding water pressure. Block 14 is located in the City’s main pressure zone. The City’s main pressure zone has a very broad range of pressures, which generally range from 40 to 160 psi, given the location. Block 14, however, is located on the south end of the main pressure zone, which experiences the lower end of allowable system pressures. The applicant has provided a water design report that includes the future development. The report shows that the future development has met the DSSP and BMC requirements for water pressure and has been certified by a Professional Engineer. As the area continues to build out, per BMC and the City’s facility plans, additional water main looping and transmission will be constructed. In general, additional looping and transmission help create a more stable pressure regime across the system.  Grading and drainage. Comments identified functionality issues with existing subdivision drainage infrastructure and staff agrees and is aware of the issue. Per the City’s engineering design standards, code provision #1 states that prior to occupancy of any phase of the Gran Cielo Block 14 master site plan, the Property Owners’ Association stormwater facilities must be rehabilitated to the capacity stated in the applicant's storm water design report. The rehabilitation must be to the satisfaction of the City of Bozeman Storm Water Division. This requirement ties the first phase of the development to the repair of identified infrastructure that is not performing according to standards identified in the subdivision design reports. Stormwater review is located in section 6b above.  Agricultural water user facilities. No agricultural ditches or water conveyance for agricultural users is located on the subject property, therefore no analysis is provided against BMC 38.360.280. General comments related to the overall subdivision development are not applicable to this site plan, except where existing subdivision infrastructure is to be utilized, see grading and drainage above.  Parking requirements. Parking is evaluated in section 7d of this report and is governed by BMC 38.540.050. The development proposes a mixture of 1, 2, and 3 bedroom units with a requirement for 1 space to be provided per 1 bedroom unit and 1.75 spaces to be provided for every 2 and 3 bedroom unit. The calculation is located on sheet 001 on the cover sheet. The application is required by this code section to provide 245 parking spaces on-site. The applicant may also reduce the number of required parking spaces for every on-street space located directly adjacent to the site that meets the dimensional standards of this section. With the multiple street frontages for the proposed development, 46 on-street spaces are provided with that reduction. The applicant may not count any on street parking not immediately adjacent to the subject property. Staff is not aware of any on-street parking restrictions for Apex Dr, S. 29th Ave, or Bennett Blvd, nor does the City enforce private covenants. The applicant did not ask for any additional reductions from the Staff Report *Revised Gran Cielo Block 14 Master Site Plan Application No. 22389 September 17, 2024 Page 25 of 25 residential parking requirements. The applicant is meeting the required parking counts in this section with 261 spaces available for resident parking. Many comments were concerned about increased local traffic and parking around their homes and danger to their pets and children. While staff does not have a specific code section to reference towards this issue, other than traffic impacts as discussed above, public comments were forwarded to the Parking Division regarding compliance with any signed parking standards. Publicly dedicated right-of-way, unless signed otherwise, is open to parking for all residents in the community and not owned by any specific property. The City does not enforce parking restrictions enacted by private covenant. If an area is signed prohibiting parking, such as in a bike lane, staff encourages residents to provide a parking complaint to the Parking division via this link: https://www.bozeman.net/departments/administration/neighborhood-services/parking/parking-complaint.  Affordable housing. House Bill 259 passed during the 2021 Montana State Legislature prohibits inclusionary zoning and the City from requiring housing fees or the dedication of real property for the purposes of providing housing for specified income levels. As a response to the passage and enactment of that bill, the City passed Ordinance 2015, which replaced the city’s inclusionary zoning requirements with voluntary affordable housing incentives under BMC 38.380. This application does not seek any incentives under BMC 38.380 and does not propose to provide any affordable housing therefore no analysis is provided. For additional information about the City’s Community Housing Program, please see their website.  Construction management. Comments regarding construction staging and parking and impacts to neighboring properties were provided. A construction management and plan was provided by the applicant with drawing 003. Staff does not have specific code requirements regarding construction parking, but an info only comment has been added to this report regarding sensitivity to adjacent homes and residences. BMC 16.06.090 provides noise requirements for construction operations, allowed hours of activity, and enforcement. Construction activities that violate this article may be reported to the Bozeman Police Department or Code Enforcement.  Parkland. Section 6c above discusses parkland requirements. Multi-household residential (apartment building uses) were planned in Block 14 with the initial Gran Cielo subdivision review. A calculation with this application provided the amount of parkland required with the known density of the proposed development. This was reviewed by the Parks Planner on the Development Review Committee and it was confirmed that credits were available for the four parcels in this master plan to offset required parkland. Residents of this block may utilize any of the public parks within the vicinity. 10. Division of Land Pertaining to Subdivisions (38.240-Part 4) Meets Code? Subdivision exemptions Yes Required easements Yes Comments: No changes to lot lines are proposed. Adequate original easements have been provided to engineering for utility infrastructure.