Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout24356 MOD Approval November 25, 2024 – Transmitted via ProjectDox Only Intrinsik Architecture tsteinway@intrinsikarchitecture.com RE: 8 Aspen Mixed Use Site Plan Modification, Application 24356 Dear Applicants, The Bozeman Department of Community Development is pleased to award approval of your modification application for the project referenced above. The application requests approval for the following modifications to the 8 Aspen Mixed Use Site Plan, Application 24051:  Remove the second floor from the building design, and reducing the building height from 7 stories and 78-feet plus a parapet and allowable encroachments, to 6-stories and 65-feet 8-inches plus a parapet with allowable encroachments.  Removal of the second floor removes the structured parking located on the second floor, and relocates the open space and storage areas to the first floor including the gym.  Rearrangement of uses on the first floor to accommodate the changes to programming. Removal of one of the two commercial tenant spaces.  Relocate the north stair tower, elevators, and elevators lobbies to avoid conflict with Northwestern Energy overhead power lines.  No changes to the number of residential units. This is still an affordable housing project with a portion of the apartments to be offered for rent at 60% AMI. Affordable Housing incentives were approved with the site plan application under BMC 38.380.030 for increased building height.  No changes to infrastructure improvements both on and off-site. These include alley improvements, utility mains, and stormwater facilities, the construction of North 8th to Juniper Street, and the construction of West Aspen Street from 7th Avenue to 8th Avenue.  All changes as detailed in application #24356. Staff forwarded a recommendation to the Community Development Director who is responsible for the final decision. Pursuant to section 38.230.150, BMC, amendments to approved plans must be reviewed and may be approved by the community development director upon determining that the amended plan is in substantial compliance with the originally approved plan with the following code provisions: Code Provisions 1. Per Section 38.100.080 & 38.200.110, the proposed project shall be completed as approved and in this application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved application materials shall invalidate the project's legitimacy, unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and approval by the Department of Community Development prior to undertaking said modifications. The only exception to this law is repair. Staff conducted a public comment period for this modification application from October 17, 2024 to November 8, 2024 due to the scope of the proposed changes. One instance of public comment was received on November 8, 2024 from E. Talago. The following list summarizes the public comment and provides a response based on the relevant review criteria:  Relationship to adjacent properties in BMC 38.520.030. This section is related to light and air access along the side and rear property lines. Buildings or portions thereof containing multi-household dwelling units whose only solar access (windows) is from the applicable side of the building (facing towards the side property line) must be set back from the applicable side or rear property lines at least 15 feet. This comment states that the appropriate setbacks were not provided. The subject property is surrounded on four sides by public right of way. The subject property does not share rear or side lot lines with any adjacent properties that may reduce light and air access to residents. The appropriate setbacks per the zoning district were provided from each property line, with the residents having additional buffer on all four sides from adjacent properties with either a 60-foot local right-of-way width, or a 20-foot alley.  Block frontage standards in BMC 38.510. The comment states that it is “unclear from the re-noticing materials how removal of the large commercial space will affect consideration of the applicable frontage standard type.” This application is still meeting block frontage standards for the Storefront designated frontage along Aspen Street and the Mixed-Landscaped frontage along N. 8th Avenue. Neither block frontage type eliminates residential lobbies and their associated residential uses as a ground level land use.  Open space standards in BMC 38.520.060. The comment states that this application does not meet open space standards due to the indoor spaces not being centrally located, and the drought tolerant plantings within shared outdoor open spaces consisting of “many areas of vegetative coverage (drought tolerant) that are not conducive to the intent of leisure and recreation.” The commenter also states that due to the open spaces being located within building setbacks they do not meet the open space standards and should not be counted.” This code section lists usable residential open space as: a. Shared open space. Shared open space may be in the form of courtyards, front porches, patios, play areas, gardens or similar spaces b. Ground level private outdoor space. This open space type is not proposed within the project. c. Balconies. Up to 50 percent of the required open space may be provided by private balconies provided they meet the requirements of subsection B.3 d. Common indoor recreation areas. The space must be located in a visible area, such as near an entrance, lobby, or high traffic corridors; the space must be designed specifically to serve interior recreational functions and not merely be leftover unrentable area used to meet the open space requirement. Such space must include amenities and design elements that will encourage use by residents. e. Shared roof decks. For mixed-use buildings, up to 100 percent of the required open space may be provided by shared roof decks located on the top of buildings which are available to all residents and meet the requirements of subsection B.5 The application is utilizing a mix of types to achieve compliance with the standard including shared open space, balconies, a shared roof deck, and common indoor recreation areas. For the shared open spaces located on the ground level primarily on the west side of the building the applicant is meeting the standards for shared open space by providing appropriate dimensions per this standard, paths, walkable lawns, landscaping, seating, lighting, and other pedestrian amenities. There is no requirement that residents be able to “take a nap or throw a Frisbee,” in every open space area, but adequate pathways, lawns, lighting and hardscape areas do provide usable open space. The shared open space is separated as required from private living spaces, streets, service areas, and parking lots partially due to its location, but also partially due to screening methods such as landscaping and fencing. There is a shared roof deck proposed on the second floor of the building which totals almost 6,000 square feet and is accessible by all residents via two doors in the second floor hallway near both the north and south elevators, making it centrally located and accessible by all residents. This deck meets the requirements in subsection B.3 by providing hard surfacing, seating, and landscaping that will encourage use. There are shared balconies located on floors 2-4 that range in size from 326 square feet to 492 square feet and are also located near other common amenities such as elevator lobbies and laundry rooms. These balconies meet the standards in this section by providing at least 36 square feet or balcony area, with no dimension less than six feet, to provide a usable space for human activity. These shared balconies total 1,796 square feet and do not make up more than 50% of the required open space area. The common indoor recreation areas meet the requirements of subsection B.4 which require them to be located in a visible area, such as near an entrance lobby, or high traffic corridors; and be specifically designed to serve indoor recreational functions. All of the indoor open space areas contain recreational space and are located near a vestibule entry and/or lobby.  Parkland in BMC 38.420. The comment states that acceptance of CIL of Parkland is inadequate for approval, and that the CIL rate set by the City does not meet the area’s needs. No changes to compliance with parkland requirements are sought with this MOD application. The site plan approval under application 24051 contains details for compliance with park and recreation requirements. The parks department reviewed the site plan application for adherence to this code section, their adopted parks plan, and the criteria of Resolution 4784. Cash-in-lieu of parkland (CILP) has not yet been paid and is a code provision required prior to building permit approval. The appraisal value is based on an appraisal report that is updated annually for adoption by the City Commission. The most recent appraisal value was adopted January 13, 2024 by Resolution 5582. Staff has forwarded this comment to the Parks Department, the commenter may contact them regarding how CILP funds are managed and invested in local parks.  Traffic impacts in BMC 38.400. No changes to traffic generation are proposed with this MOD application. The site plan approval under application 24051 contains details for compliance with transportation facilities, and access. The engineering division reviewed the site plan for compliance with adopted design standards, public works standards, and municipal code with the design of the applicant’s required on and off-site infrastructure requirements. A separate infrastructure review according to the process outlined by the Engineering webpage is required for engineering permits and work in the public right-of-way.  Affordable housing standards in BMC 38.380. This modification does not alter the affordable housing plan provided to the City and the Economic Development staff report located in the project file for site plan application 24051. No floor plan changes or changes to individual unit design are proposed with this application.  LIHTC and the public hearing on February 6, 2024. The commenter states that with the proposed changes in this MOD application it would be “prudent to reevaluate this project’s eligibility for tax exempt status.” The City does not administer tax credits, the Montana Board of Housing does through their application and award process. State law requires that the City hold a public hearing to provide an opportunity for the public to comment on how the proposed low-income rental housing meets the community’s needs. As the commenter provided, that public hearing has already taken place. Since there are no changes to the affordable housing plan, number, size, or quality of units provided with this application staff considers this state requirement as completed. If the Montana Board of Housing would like the City to hold a new hearing to provide opportunity for public comment the City will comply. It is important to note that the City Commission is not voting or taking action at these hearings as they do not have review authority over state tax credits. Staff has forwarded this letter to the City’s Community Housing Division.  Parking. The commenter states that the “Midtown Neighborhood Association requests resources for the creation of a residential parking permit district in existing neighborhoods adjacent to the zero parking minimum boundary.” This is not a review criteria for the MOD application approval. Staff has forwarded this letter to the Neighborhood Services Division. You have the right to appeal this decision of the Community Development Director pursuant to the provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code. Please note that this decision is subject to appeal by other aggrieved parties as defined by Sec. 38.700.020 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. Such appeals must be filed pursuant to the provisions of Sec. 38.250.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. An appeal must be filed within 10 working days following the date of this decision. If a valid appeal is filed, no further action on the project may proceed until a decision on the appeal is made by the City Commission, and the Community Development Department and Building Division will not be able to approve any building permits or to perform any inspections related to this application. If you have any more questions, or if the Community Development Department can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at dgarber@bozeman.net. Sincerely, Danielle Garber, Senior Planner Department of Community Development For office use only DATE OF FINAL DECISION ______________________________ DIRECTOR’S SIGNATURE _______________________________