Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-13-24 Public Comment - B. Clem - Fwd_ Block 104 concernsFrom:Simon Lindley To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:Fw: [EXTERNAL]Information requested about E. Aspen Development and Block 104 Date:Wednesday, December 11, 2024 9:34:56 AM Below is a public comment received from Bobbi Clem for application 24107 805 N Ida Ave SP CCOA DEM. From: Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2024 10:56 AM To: Simon Lindley <slindley@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: Fw: [EXTERNAL]Information requested about E. Aspen Development and Block 104 Hey Simon, I just got off the phone with Bobbi Clem. She owns the lots directly west of the Block 104 development. She has some concerns and questions about runoff and the street improvements. I sent her your info so she will probably reach out, but I wanted to give you a heads up. It might result in having a larger conversation with Lance or Nick. Cheers, ----Sarah Rosenberg, AICPAssociate Planner | Historic Preservation OfficerCity of Bozeman LGBTQ+ Liaison406.582.2297Pronouns: she/they The City of Bozeman is currently revising its Historic Preservation Program. For more information, visit https://engage.bozeman.net/landmark From: Bobbi Clem <bbiclem@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 3:54 PM To: Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Information requested about E. Aspen Development and Block 104 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. Sarah, I'd like to introduce myself to you. My name is Bobbi Clem, and I'm the owner of WallaceNorth LLC, the property that includes 802, 810, and 820 N Wallace. My property isimmediately across Wallace Ave from Wallace Works and immediately to the East from theproposed Block 104 development. My 802 N. Wallace building adjoins E. Aspen Street,which I know is going to be torn up and utilities added by the City of Bozeman to accommodate growth in the area. I understand that there is going to be a City of BozemanCommission Hearing asking for $3.66 in TIFF to complete Aspen Street improvements. As one of the property owners who will be greatly impacted by the work being proposed, I would like to have you provide me with more details about what is being proposed. I wouldlike to know what improvements will be included, such as the timing. I know that the improvements were planned for E. Aspen as I have been in touch with both Erik Nelson andInstrinik Architects, but I do not have up-to-date information or details about the areas that will be impacted on my property. For example, I have asked that I be allowed to modify the sewer & water connection into mybuilding when the work was being done, as I still have the original 100-year-old connection. I just found out about this 2 days ago, thanks to Erik Nelson, and I'm quite concerned that Iwon't be able to get engineering done in time to get my work completed in time to do as I have requested for several years. I have dealt with flooding in my basement several times due tothis issue, and I was told this would alleviate the problem. I also hoped that streetlights would be added when the work was done on E. Aspen. I have been hoping that we could try and address the lack of street lighting on N Wallace infront of my property and along the N Wallace if the TIF District were requested. I would appreciate it if you could give me a call when you have a moment. --Bobbi Clem 406 570 2594 From:Simon Lindley To:Bozeman Public Comment Subject:Fw: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Block 104 concerns Date:Wednesday, December 11, 2024 9:36:08 AM Attachments:Adobe Scan Dec 9, 2024 (1).pdf Below is a public comment received from Bobbi Clem for application 24107 805 N Ida Ave SP CCOA DEM. From: Bobbi Clem <bbiclem@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 9:54 AM To: Simon Lindley <slindley@BOZEMAN.NET>; Sarah Rosenberg <SRosenberg@BOZEMAN.NET>; David Fine <dfine@bizeman.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Block 104 concerns 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. ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Bobbi <bbiclem@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 8:23 AMSubject: Block 104 concernsTo: Bobbi Clem <bbiclem@gmail.com> To: Simon Lindley, City of Bozeman Engineering Department CC: Sarah Rosenberg, City of Bozeman Planning DepartmentDavid Fine, City of Bozeman Economic Development Re: Cncerns on Bozeman Yards Project: Block 104 Date: 12.8.24 Simon, to follow up on the conversations that I’ve had with you and Sarah Rosenberg, we are contacting you with some concerns about the Block 104 development as proposed, specifically the alley access to the underground parking areas for both the proposed building, and the 2nd building to be built at a later date. We have outlined our concerns and sent supporting documentation about the reasons for our concerns. My husband and I, Bill and Bobbi Clem have owned and managed commercial property Wallace North LLC since we purchased the property in 2005. Our property consists of twelve lots, which has three commercial buildings, 802, 810 and 820 N Wallace on the corner of N Wallace Avenue and E. Tamarack, which is immediately to the west of the proposed Bozeman Yards Project. There is a shared 16' alley that runs between the two properties. While we have sent a letter of conditional support for the project, including support to allow the developer to be allowed to access $3.66M in TIF Funds to help offset the cost of development costs, we do have several concerns with the development that we will feel still need to be addressed. 1. Traffic & Safety Concerns about entry to the underground parking structures: The current proposed development is only for the south building, but will eventually have two buildings, which will have a central entrance to the parking garage under each building. Both entrances and the garbage and recycling area are located on the far west of both buildings off of the 16' alley that also runs through our property. We believe that most tenants of Block 104 will want to use the shortest route to the entrance to the garage and cut across our property off of N Wallace Avenue, vs drive the slightly longer route along Tamarack, angle onto Front Street. This Historic District was built long before current zoning, and as a result the streets are much narrower than they would be on similar streets developed at a later date. There is already significant traffic on North Wallace Avenue, which is going to get worse when the Wallace Works Project is fully built, and if we, the two residences next to the Lehrkind Mansion or the Tinworks site are developed, we believe that it would be greatly reduce traffic and increase safety if this traffic was kept on East Tamarack Street and the entrance to and from the development made from Front Street, and not North Wallace Avenue. We have maintained our parking lot access onto East Tamarack Street even though we don’t need a third access to encourage our tenants to come and go off of East Tamarack. 2. Negative Impact on our property: The other reason that we have concerns about the location of the entrance to the parking entrances and trash and recycling containers in the alley, is that we assume that the developers are not aware that there will be a negative impact on our property if we are forced to move the trash receptacle and open up the alley which is on the other side of your trash and recycling collection bins. Currently there is a fence between the two properties. In May 2007 we applied and were granted the right to locate our trash receptacle in the 16’ alley that runs between what was our property and at that time Treasure State Oil, which is now the north part of the Bozeman Yards Project. We agreed that we would relocate this trash receptacle at a later date if the alley was to be reinstated. See attached Enroachment Permit dated 5.1.2007. Based on this document, we think the owners of Block 104 assumed that it would be a simple matter for us to relocate our trash receptacle to clear the alley, but this is not the case. After 2007, we moved the trash receptacle farther to the west in order to create a large courtyard behind the trash area to on the south side of our 820 N. Wallace building, This courtyard included the area which is considered part of the alley that runs through both properties. We understood that this 16’ wide area had to remain free of any permanent structures. The courtyard was not put in for aesthic purposes, but was done to address serious runoff problems that we experienced which caused significant flooding in the 820 N Wallace building. We did not realize that we would have this issue when we filed for the Enroachment Permit on 5.1.2007, as we had purchased the property in 2005, and both the 810 and 820 N Wallace building was still occupied for some time by the previous tenants. We did not discover the seriousness of the flooding until we were renovating the 820 N Wallace building. This flooding occurred because the previous owners had paved the property over the existing dirt, and had not accounted for any way for the water from the roofs to drain. We have included a site plan which shows all three of our buildings, and as you can see the north side of the 810 N Wallace building is located close to the SE corner of the 820 N Wallace building, and due the slope of the pavement the runoff from 35’ x 70’ of roof sloped directly to the corner of the building, causing flooding into the back unit of the property. As you imagin 2450 sq.ft. of roof creates alot of runoff. We have insulated the ceilings of the 810 N Wallace buildings as we completed renovations, and added more gutters & downspouts, but we think the amount of runoff will still be enough that flooding will occur if we remove the courtyard in the 16' alley. The building of this courtyard was also not done without the knowledge of the City of Bozeman, as we consulted with the City of Bozeman Engineers to see if they had any ideas to help us, and they suggested either a drywell, or removing a large section of pavement, excavating and putting in gravel and creating a place for the runoff to drain. We chose this option and it worked well. In order for the water to drain, the area could not be paved, but needed to remain porous and be large enough that a large quantity of water would be able to soak into the ground before it made it to our building. We opted to turn this into a nice courtyard for the tenant that occupies that space, but the purpose was and still is to control roof runoff and prevent the building from flooding. We assume from the C.3-1 drawing that the Block 104 development assumes that they want to remove the fence between our two properties and ask us to relocate our garbage and recycling containers. We understand that part of this area is an alley, but we need to address how we can take care of the resulting water runoff issue that this will create. We assume that the existing courtyard, which I have included a picture of for your reference is also too soft to withstand the weight of heavy garbage trucks, and is too uneven for snow removal in the winter (we only shovel the sidewalk to the entrance in the winter) Solutions?: Our preference is that there continue to be some kind of fence between the two properties so that access to the Block 104 parking garage and garbage and recycling is access solely from Front Street, so that we can retain our courtyard for runoff, garbage and recycling on our side of the alley. If this is not possible we are open to suggestions that will address our concerns. --Bobbi Clem 406 570 2594 Bobbi 406.570.2594IPhone --Bobbi Clem 406 570 2594 .. o.ei ♦ .. ♦ .. O,l,L .. fOL6L .a "S l l.6 l + l + I 4="£,J� l3f··nvc�N \WAU...1¼-C.� NOR,H � gsu:>ct< 101 "f'f{t) t?�l<f'( 9zoN WA ..... �• C-c,t,f'f YAtal 8 ,o pj..-_p� i /'1lt.?NOf-F rw� w1s; 'fSV I !,,-p o.Jb r w I)) c;. ,,,rrz> &Jvp.T'( M<-V <-vv M f77-r-J=� 10 .W�'>f t:'-F C t>t.J le; TYA p.q:, � cov1'Nlt�D � 3 1&;,�\l:E"i... W/ Cf="-1�T'F'-A\J¾S-�S • 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. � oz� -=--;;;1 l ENCROACHMENT PERMIT APPLICATION ri"':;'; ; ' 1u..u::. ...... -""I • .'.,; Ii 01 ;1l: Permit# /(-0$01 Name of Applicant: ::B9e>B I C:,kEM ,/w Acl .1 .frc..:E. :f';,d11:I. ,/ f\) b L-t.., e,_Address of Applicant: f$0:c1. N , w A:! J ,l't:<' r A.I/ i==-oo F,<M'h'Vl MJr 1 '5Cl-::;-,1� Applicant Contact�e, I ('.,).$&,A Phone# f285"--'¥f,-, Cf . If Applicant is a Corporation, give State of Incorporation and names o�lnfjd 4 Secretary: Nature of Permit desired: (Give sufficient detail to permit thorough understanding, and submit blue prints or sketches in triplicate goo 6 /exit - /J IAJd/J.a et tl(/.ff<j ,. 1/ 'fh.t f:r-1.aMM-k stz;d;.p /J4¥Mbf 41 J-<k:,t< 5,,/,-ftrmcl Wu. k,,,,Jtu lkYld�_,,-!ul/Jnwcf MH, wmll._J,d,,.,c.a:1-L >¼✓� � IPcahm ;,v a/ltn,J a,,/�--1-,:, Ju_,/C-1.J��d'. 1 - PERMIT The Encroachment Permit is subject to the following terms: l.TERM. This pennit shall be in full force and effect from the date of City Approval shown belowuntil revoked as herein provided and shall be limited to the encroachment's specifically identifiedin the application at the location as shown on the attached Exhibit A.2.The fee for issuance of this pennit is ___ N/ A. _______ _3.REVOCATION. This pennit may be revoked by the City .of Bozeman upon giving 90 dayswritten notice to the Pennittee by regular mail, at the address shown in the application. The Cityof Bozeman may revoke this pennit without notice during an emergency or if Pennittee violatesany of the conditions or tenns. If the Pennittee fails to remove the pennitted encroachment(s) andrestore said right-of-way to its previous condition within said 90-day period, or in an emergency,in a reasonable time, the City at its option may remove the same and restore said right-of-way toits previous condition and permittee shall pay the cost and expense thereof to the City.4.COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. No work shall be commenced until Pennittee provides 48 hourwritten notice·to the City Engineer prior to the date the Permittee proposes to commence work.S.CHANGES IN RIGHf-OF WAY. If City infrastructure necessitates changes in the structures, orfacilities installed under this pennit, Permittee will make necessary changes ·without expense toCity.6.CITY SAVED HARMLESS FROM CLAIMS. As a consideration of issuance of this permit, thePennittee, its successors or assigns, agree to protect the City of Bozeman and save it harmlessfrom any and all liabilities, claims, demands, actions, costs and attorney's fees of every kind anddescription which may accrue to, or be suffered by, any person or persons, corporations orproperty by reason of the performance of any such work, character of materials used, or manner ofinstallations, maintenance and operation, or arising out of the Pennittee's use or occupancy of saidCity property or right-of-way, and in case any suit or action is brought against the City ofBozeman and arising out of, or by reason of, any of the above causes, the Pennittee, its successorsor assigns, will, upon notice to them of the commencement of such action, defend the City at itssole cost and expense and satisfy any judgment which may be rendered against the City ofBozeman in any such suit or action.7.The permittee shall protect the work area with traffic control devices which comply with theManual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices <MUTCD}. Pennittee may be required to submit atraffic control plan to the City Engineer for approval, prior to starting work. During work, theCity of Bozeman may require the permittce to use additional traffic control devices to protecttraffic or the work area. No road closure shall occur without prior approval from the CityEngineer or his designee. All construction materials temporarily stored within the traveled way ofany street shall be adequately barricaded in accordance with the MlITCD.8.RIGHf-OF-W A Y AND DRAINAGE. If work done under this pennit interferes in any way withthe drainage of City property or right-of-way, the Pennittee shall, at its expense, make suchprovisions as the City may direct to remedy the interference.9.RUBBISH AND DEBRIS. Upon completion of work contemplated under this permit, all rubbishand debris shall be immediately removed and the roadside left in a neat and presentable conditionsatisfactory to the City.10.INSPECTION. The installation authorized by this permit shall be in compliance with theattached plan and the conditions of this permit. The pennittee may be required to remove or revisethe installation, at the sole expense of pennittee, if the installation does not conform with therequirements of this permit or the attached plan.2 11.CITY'S RIGHT NOT TO BE INTERFERED WITH. Initial installation, changes, reconstructionor relocation of the permitted encroachment(s) shall be done by Pennittce so as to cause the leastinterference with any of the City's work. The City shall not be liable for any damage to thePermittee by reason of any work by the City, its agents, contractors or representatives, or by theexercise of any rights by the City for the encroachment(s) placed under this permit.12.CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, REMOVAL OP INSTALLATIONS OR STRUCTURES.Permittce, at permittee's sole cost and expense shall construct, maintain, replace, relocate and/orremove the installation, facility, or structure in accordance with the applicable City and industrystandards. Furthennore, after completion of any of the aforementioned construction, permitteeshall fill in any excavations and restore the right-of-way to its original condition. The City shallhave the right at any time to require permittee to maintain, reconstruct, replace relocate and/orremove its facility from the right-or-way, all at the permittee's expense.13.CITY NOT LIABLE FOR DAMAGE TO INSTALLATIONS. In accepting this pennit thePennittee agrees that any damage or injury done to said installations, structures, or otherencroachments by any City employee engaged in construction, alteration, repair, maintenance orimprovement of its property or right-of-way shall not be the responsibility or liability of the City.14.CITY TO BE REIMBURSED FOR REPAIRING ROADWAY. Permittee agrees to promptlyreimburse the City for any expense incurred in repairing surface of roadway due to settlement atinstallation authorized under this permit, or for any other damage to roadway or associatedstructures which occurred as a result of the work performed under this permit.15.Other Conditions and Remarks:APPLICANT The undersigned hereby certifies !hat s/hc is empowered to execute !his document and that the "Pennittee· agrees to lhe terms of this permit. 'f:tn5e, ?:kEM ifw"u .,st= 0-Jn 1 ;,J&, PERMIITEE (Please print name) COMPANY OR CORPORATION By :f'BE SI )2-e:I\/,: (Tille) lfx�·Cik«i (Signature) (Date) CITY OF BOZEMAN __{APPROVED _DISAPPROVED (Signature) /J>,I� ',.;t!:dTtl;Jt Amtuiv1 (Title) (Date) ! -, 1 5 / \ Ii it I I I / ii 1,,1 , .... _ .....T -, / \ I I I /, .... _ ..... 1t!f 1111!f ,,, ' I • ,. I _____ / I/i • I Ii I lb i � I IL I lil -y--1 -r--����\11 ,� n1 !H1 llh ! 0 l !II• . Ii Ii •· ' 'ir -I .J.J.c··.-, I co : 7 111,1�� ' : a'�. r!· = .-,,, 11 ' 11-,n �1 111.1111mam11_.u__,,_ _______ _005 - C1.0 -OVERALL CIVIL SITE PLAN.pdf Open with Google Docs i � h ,; i i t � .: .. §� " -, @-so ---so---so---so---,o---�--10---•o---so-P--• @-h----•s----so---lS----os----t:S---/4 w 7 I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I NEW BUll.lltNC UTILITY I I I I S£RT LINE'S I I I I 1�UTY I I I I I u,:,; / I I I Mrn:Rs I I I I l I I I I JTRANSF,£,ER� Ilillj , 'ffll • :"'�.: 'L!IHWi ''a§Mffl& ��-�"'\,I/�'\. / '\. 'I I I ///.0.//UU ,.,.,,.., ...... :-� �. ---� �:\"' �� y-�'\. '\.' I I I I I I I I I I I I 14'-I unurl METERS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I � \O' UTILITY �ASCMENT I PAOPCJUY I UN£ (n,>) I I I ""