HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-09154 Rudolf, Board of Adjustment staff report, 11-09
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT STAFF REPORT
RUDOLF RESIDENCES SP/COA/DEV
FILE #Z-09154
Item: Zoning Application #Z-09154, requesting the relocation of the
existing single-household residence and the construction of a new
single-household residence at 801 South Grand Avenue. Two
deviations are required with the application. The property is legally
described as Lots 1-3, Block 4, Butte Addition, City of Bozeman,
Gallatin County, Montana, and is zoned as R-1, Residential Single-
Household, Low Density District..
Property Owner: Jeri Rudolf
801 South Grand Avenue
Bozeman, MT 59715
Representative: Intrinsik Architecture
111 North Tracy Avenue
Bozeman, MT 59715
Date & Time: Board of Adjustment Public Hearing: Tuesday, November 10, 2009
at 6:00 p.m., in the City Commission Room, 121 North Rouse
Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Report By: Allyson C. Bristor, Associate Planner
Recommendation: Support all deviation requests with conditional approval
PROJECT LOCATION
The Rudolf Residences Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness application with deviations is for the
property located at 801 South Grand Avenue. It is legally described as Lots 1-3, Block 4, Butte Addition,
City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is located within the Bon Ton Historic
District and the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. The overall lot area of the property is
11,200 square feet.
A one-story, single-household residence exists on the subject property. The original house on the
property first appeared on Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps in 1904 and was a one-and-one-half story
building with an L-shaped plan. A picture of the original house is included in the applicant’s materials.
The house was drastically altered into its current Ranch architectural style sometime after 1943. Because
of this alteration, the house is listed as “non-contributing” in the Bon Ton Historic District.
PROPOSAL & BACKGROUND
Property owner Jeri Rudolf, and applicant Intrinsik Architecture, submitted a Site Plan and Certificate of
Appropriateness application with deviations to the Department of Planning & Community Development.
The proposal is the following: 1) to demolish the existing detached, one-story, three-car garage, 2) to
move and reorient the existing one-story, single-household residence to the western portion of the lot (in
the garage’s current location), 3) construct a new, two-story, single-household residence on the eastern
portion of the property, and 4) construct a one-story, detached garage for each residence.
Two houses are permitted on the property because the lot area is over 10,000 square feet (a minimum of
5,000 square feet is required for each single-household residence as required by the Unified Development
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 1
Ordinance). The property owner and applicant are intending to submit a subdivision exemption
application in the future to officially divide the large lot into two lots. The application materials shows
the proposed property line, but it is not approved with this Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness
application.
Two deviations are required for the proposal. Both are from Section 18.16.050, “Yards,” to allow each of
the residences to encroach into the required 20-foot front yard setback on College Street. A 20-foot front
yard setback is required on College Street because it is designated as a collector street between South
rd
Grand and South 3 Avenues in the Greater Bozeman Transportation Plan.
The Board of Adjustment is charged with the final approval of the project because of the requested
deviations. The site plan application is required to be reviewed by Administrative Design Review (ADR)
Staff and the Development Review Committee (DRC). The Design Review Board (DRB) is also required
to review the proposal because it involves the movement of a structure within the Bon Ton Historic
District.
The DRC completed their three week review of the project on August 26, 2009. The DRB reviewed the
project at their public meeting on August 26, 2009 where the majority of the board stated concern with
some of the elements in the new house design (House B in the applicant materials). The DRB motion
was to open and continue the project, with some added suggestions in design revisions for House B. The
property owner and applicant requested the project be opened and continued to the DRB meeting of
October 28, 2009 and the BOA’s hearing of November 10, 2009. The additional time was requested to
revise the proposal according to the DRB recommendations.
The DRB reviewed the revised proposal at their public meeting on October 28, 2009. The majority of the
board found the revisions to adequately address the original design concerns. A motion of project
approval, with Planning Staff’s comments, is forwarded to the BOA for their consideration.
ZONING DESIGNATION & LAND USES
The development proposal is in conformance with the designated R-1 zoning, Residential Single-
Household, Low Density District, which is to provide for primarily single-household residential
development and related uses within the City at urban densities, and to provide for such community
facilities and services as will serve the area’s residents while respecting the residential character and
quality of the area. The subject property is surrounded by R-1 zoned parcels and predominately
surrounded by single-household residential uses. The historic T.B. Story Mansion property is located to
the east of the subject property across South Grand Avenue. That property is currently going through a
Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application for a Second or Subsequent Minor Subdivision from a
Tract of Record, to allow the subdivision of 2.15 acres into two lots to provide a separate lot for the
Mansion and related site developments and a separate lot for a dedicated park. See below for a zoning
map.
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 2
GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION
The development proposal is in general conformance with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan including
the “Residential” land use designation. This category designates places where the primary activity is
urban density dwellings. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low
intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. Implementation of this category
by residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in proximity to
commercial centers. The residential designation indicates that it is expected that development will occur
within municipal boundaries, which may require annexation prior to development.
REVIEW CRITERIA & FINDINGS
Section 18.28.050 “Standards for Certificates of Appropriateness”
Section 18.28.050 specifies the required standards for granting Certificate of Appropriateness approval.
Planning Staff evaluated the applicant's request under the standards and offers comments below. Staff
looked at both house designs, House A (existing) and House B (new). The comments on House B focus
on the revisions that occurred with the proposal.
A. All work performed in completion of an approved Certificate of Appropriateness shall be in
conformance with the most recent edition of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring
and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (Published 1995), published by U.S. Department of
the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,
Heritage Preservation Services, Washington, D.C. (available for review at the Department
of Planning).
The existing building is listed as “intrusive” on the Montana Historical and Architectural
Inventory form. This terminology is no longer used. The house would now be described as
“non-contributing” in the Bon Ton Historic District. Therefore, this first section of criteria is not
applicable.
B. Architectural appearance design guidelines used to consider the appropriateness and
compatibility of proposed alterations with original design features of subject structures or
properties, and with neighboring structures and properties, shall focus upon the following:
1. Height;
House A
No change in height occurs when House A is moved and reoriented on site.
House B
Staff supports the proposed building height of 28’-4”. The height is appropriate for the
neighboring one-story buildings to the south and west and the surrounding one and one-and-
one-half story structures in the Bon Ton Historic District.
2. Proportions of doors and windows
;
House A
Planning Staff is requiring that all new windows proposed for House A be changed in design
so they are more similar in style and design of the existing windows (likely awning, casement
or picture styles).
House B
Staff finds the large glass area on the Grand Avenue building elevation under the covered
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 3
porch area as contemporary in design, but historically appropriate because it is divided into
smaller panes similar to those windows seen traditionally. The remaining windows are found
as appropriate in proportion and location. The majority of windows incorporate divided
panes in their designs. The non-divided, awning style windows are appropriately located on
the building elevations so to not disrupt the wall-to-window ratio. Staff is requiring a glass
material/window in the transition area between the flat roof rear wing and the gable roof front
portion.
3. Relationship of building masses and spaces;
House A & House B
Both houses are located to supply front yard areas to the north, along College Street, and rear
yard areas to the south. Staff is supportive of supplying the rear yards for both houses on the
same side of the lot. The pattern of rear yards to the south is consistent with the existing
house pattern further west on College Street.
The detached garages are permitted to encroach into the required rear yards per the Unified
Development Ordinance as long as they are less than 600 square feet in building footprint
size.
House A
The detached garage for House A is appropriately accessed off the alley.
House B
House B is also proposing a front yard to the east along Grand Avenue. Staff encouraged the
applicant to supply two front yards for House B during informal review of the project. The
front covered porch addresses both street frontages by supplying steps on both the north and
east sides.
The detached garage for House B is accessed from a driveway off Grand Avenue and is
appropriately set to the rear/side of the house. Staff finds the garage’s location as accessory
because it is located behind the house’s front plane facing Grand Avenue. The carport is
three feet behind the front plane and the garage door is located 21 feet behind the front plane.
Staff also finds this setback helps to minimize the surface parking in front of the garage from
Grand Avenue.
4. Roof shape;
House A
No change in roof shape occurs when House A is moved and reoriented on site.
House B
The rear wing of the house and the detached garage/carport roof is a flat roof shape which
may be inappropriate for historic residential areas. However, the rear wing of the house is
offset from the house’s gabled roof front portion at 18 inches and the garage/carport front
edge is set three feet behind the house’s front plane along Grand Avenue. Staff finds the
design and location of the flat roof forms are minimized enough to make them accessory to
the primary, gable roof form of the house, and therefore, appropriate for the Bon Ton Historic
District.
Though the slight porch overhang is flat roof in form, Staff finds it as a contemporary
interpretation of a traditional front porch.
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 4
5. Scale;
House A & House B
Both houses cover less than the 40 percent of the total lot area, at 31.4 percent. Staff finds
this lot coverage percentage as appropriate for the corner location.
House A
No change in building footprint or scale occurs when House A is moved and reoriented on
site.
House B
The house building footprint is small at 895 square feet. Staff finds the small footprint as
appropriate for the surrounding historic neighborhood. The one-car garage building footprint
is also small at 275 square feet.
6. Directional expression;
House A
Staff supports the proposed reorientation of House A when moved on the site. The removal
of two rear doors, and the addition of two front doors and two new windows, changes the
existing rear (north) elevation to more of a street facing façade. The entry porch also helps to
address the street front on College Street. Planning Staff is requiring the private sidewalk for
House A connect at the entry porch.
House B
A covered front porch wraps the southeast corner of the house. Staff finds the covered porch
area as one of the most important design features of House B. It adds a pedestrian scale to
the front facades of the house design by appropriately addressing both street frontages (Grand
Avenue and College Street). It is clear that one can enter the house from either street.
Private sidewalks are also proposed from both public street sidewalks.
7. Architectural details;
House A
Minimal changes occur with House A’s architectural details after it is reoriented and moved
on site. Planning Staff is requiring that all new windows proposed for House A be changed in
design so they are more similar in style and design of the existing windows (likely awning,
casement or picture styles).
House B
Staff supports the open grid pavers design for the garage driveway of House B.
Though the porch is flat roof in form, Staff finds it as a contemporary interpretation of a
traditional front porch.
The rear wing of the new house and detached house is proposed with a 3” vertical lap siding.
Staff believes the 3” vertical lap siding is appropriate for the detached garage because it is an
accessory building. Staff also believes the material is appropriate for the rear wing as well
because of the 18-inch offset between the rear wing and the front portion of the house.
Staff supports the five-foot high fence. Staff also finds the addition of a flat roof, covered
walkway as a positive in the design changes because it is set behind the front plane of the
house and it helps better tie together the carport and fence design
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 5
8. Concealment of non-period appurtenances, such as mechanical equipment;
House A & House B
Per code provisions, all mechanical equipment, including air conditioner units, must be
screened. Details of all mechanical screening shall be submitted with the revised submittal.
9. Materials and color scheme.
House A & House B
Planning Staff is requiring a materials board and color palette to be submitted. Overall, Staff
finds the proposed materials for both houses as historically appropriate.
C. Contemporary, non-period and innovative design of new structures and additions to
existing structures shall be encouraged when such new construction or additions do not
destroy significant historical, cultural or architectural structures, or their components, and
when such design is compatible with the foregoing elements of the structure and the
surrounding structures.
Staff finds the overall proposal as supportive because of the preservation of House A on the site.
The new construction is an appropriate mix of traditional building form and contemporary
architectural detailing.
D. When applying the standards of subsections A-C, the review authority shall be guided by
the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District which are
hereby incorporated by this reference. When reviewing a contemporary, non-period, or
innovative design of new structures, or addition to existing structure, the review authority
shall be guided by the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District to determine whether the proposal is compatible with any existing or surrounding
structures.
Staff considered the applicable chapters of the Design Guidelines for Historic Preservation & the
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District while making comments for the architectural
appearance design guidelines.
E. Conformance with other applicable development standards of this title.
The required criteria for granting deviations are examined in the following section of this report.
Section 18.28.070 “Deviations from Underlying Zoning Requirements”
Section 18.28.070 specifies the required criteria for granting deviations from the underlying zoning
requirements. In the discussion below, Planning Staff evaluated the applicant's request, to allow each of
the residences to encroach into the required 20-foot front yard setback on College Street, in light of these
.
criteria
A.Modifications shall be more historically appropriate for the building and site in question,
and the adjacent properties, as determined by the standards in § 18.28.050 of this chapter,
than would be achieved under a literal enforcement of this title;
The 20-foot front yard setback is required because of College Street’s collector classification in
the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (updated 2007).
The existing three-car garage, proposed for demolition, supplies a 15-foot yard setback along
College Street. Planning Staff finds the removal of the garage as more historically appropriate
for the building and site in question. The garage was added to the site after the house remodel
and creates traffic engineering concerns with the drive access onto College Street, which carries a
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 6
high traffic volume during peak travel times.
The existing house supplies an 8-foot yard setback along College Street. Given the existing
residential development further west on College Street, Planning Staff is supportive of a reduction
of the 20-foot front yard setback to 15 feet. House A provides a 15’-7” front yard setback and
House B provides a 15’-0” front yard setback, with a small additional 4’-0” encroachment with
the window well and landscaped planter. Planning Staff finds the front yard encroachment for
both houses as more historically appropriate for the surrounding residential development. The
reduction of encroachment of 8’-0” to 11’-0” for the house closest to the corner is an
improvement for site.
It is the determination of the Historic Preservation Office and ADR Staff that, with conditions of
approval, the project meets Criteria A of Section 18.28.070 “Deviations from Underlying Zoning
Requirements,” of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, B.M.C.
B.Modifications will have minimal adverse effect on abutting properties or the permitted uses
thereof;
Planning Staff finds the proposed 20-foot rear yard to the south as an appropriate buffer for the
neighboring houses to the south. Staff finds the addition of a new house with a small building
footprint to have a minimal adverse effect on abutting properties.
It is the determination of the Historic Preservation Office and ADR Staff that, with conditions of
approval, the project meets Criteria B of Section 18.28.070 “Deviations from Underlying Zoning
Requirements,” of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, B.M.C.
C.Modifications shall assure the protection of the public health, safety and general welfare.
The removal of the existing three-car garage drive access from this property is found to be a great
improvement to the protection of public health and safety.
It is the determination of the Historic Preservation Office and ADR Staff that, with conditions of
approval, the project meets Criteria C of Section 18.28.070 “Deviations from Underlying Zoning
Requirements,” of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, B.M.C.
Section 18.28.080 “Demolition or Movement of Structures or Sites Within the Conservation
District”
The demolition or movement of any structure or site within the conservation district shall be
subject to the provisions of this chapter and section. The review procedures and criteria for the
demolition or movement of any structure or site within the conservation district are as follows:
A. Applications for the demolition or movement of structures within the conservation district
will not be accepted without a complete submittal for the subsequent development or
treatment of the site after the demolition or movement has occurred. The subsequent
development or treatment must be approved prior to the demolition or moving permit may
be issued.
The application included plans for subsequent development after the existing house has moved to
the west side of the property.
B. The demolition or movement of conservation district principal and accessory structure or
sites, which are designated as intrusive or neural elements by the Montana Historical and
Architectural Inventory, and are not within recognized historic districts or in other ways
listed on the National Register of Historic Places, shall be subject to approval by the
Planning Director after review and recommendation of Administrative Design Review staff
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 7
or Design Review Board as per Chapters 18.34 and 18.62, BMC, and the standards outlined
in Section 18.28.050, BMC.
The existing house is designated as “intrusive,” or “non-contributing.” The proposed subsequent
development is to move the existing house to the west side of the property and to build a new
house in the location of the existing house. Planning Staff is offering conditional approval of this
.
subsequent developmentThe BOA is charged with the final approval, rather than the Planning
Director, because of the deviation requests.
C. The demolition or movement of conservation district principal and accessory structures or
sites, which are designated as contributing elements by the Montana Historical and
Architectural Inventory, and all properties within historic districts and all landmarks, shall
be subject to approval by the City Commission, through a public hearing. Notice of the
public hearing before the City Commission shall be provided in accordance with Chapter
18.76, BMC. Prior to the public hearing, the City Commission shall receive a
recommendation from Administrative Design Review Staff and the Design Review Board.
The Montana Historical and Architectural Inventory Form shall be reviewed and, if
necessary, updated by the historic preservation staff to reflect current conditions on the site,
prior to the review of the demolition or movement proposal. The final authority for
demolition or movement of structures or sites within this section shall rest with the City
Commission.
Not applicable. The building proposed for demolition is designated as a “non-contributing”
structure within the Bon Ton Historic District.
D. If an application for demolition or moving is denied, issuance of a demolition or moving
permit shall be stayed for a period of two years from the date of the final decision in order
to allow the applicant and the City to explore alternatives to the demolition or move,
including but not limited to, the use of tax credits or adaptive reuse. The two year stay may
be terminated at any point in time if an alternate proposal is approved or if sufficient
additional evidence is presented to otherwise satisfy the requirements of subsection B or C
of this section.
Not applicable. Planning Staff is recommending conditional approval of the proposal.
E. All structures or sites approved for demolition or moving shall be fully documented in a
manner acceptable to the Historic Preservation Officer and Administrative Design Review
Staff prior to the issuance of demolition or moving permits.
Planning Staff is requiring the applicant to submit scaled building elevations of the existing
house, so it is clear how each elevation changes with the move on the property.
F. In addition to the remedies in Chapter 18.64, BMC, the owner of any structure or site that
is demolished or moved contrary to the provisions of this section, and any contractor
performing such work, may be required to reconstruct such structure or site in a design
and manner identical to its condition prior to such illegal demolition or move, and in
conformance with all applicable codes and regulations.
Not applicable. The applicant made proper application for the move and reorientation request.
Section 18.34.090 “Site Plan and Master Site Plan Review Criteria”
In considering applications for site plan approval under this title, the Planning Director, City Commission,
DRC, and when appropriate, the ADR staff, the DRB or WRB shall consider the following:
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 8
A. Conformance to and consistency with the City’s adopted growth policy;
The development proposal is in conformance with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan including
the “Residential” land use designation.
B. Conformance to this title, including the cessation of any current violations;
The applicant must comply with all provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code, which are
applicable to this project prior to receiving final site plan approval. 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.
Planning
Section 18.34.130, “Final Site Plan,” no later than six months after the date of
approval of a preliminary site plan or master site plan, the applicant shall submit to
the Department of Planning seven (7) copies of a final site plan. The final site plan
shall contain all of the conditions, corrections and modifications approved by the
Department of Planning.
Section 18.34.130, a Building Permit must be obtained prior to the work, and must be
obtained within one year of final site plan approval. Building Permits will not be
issued until the final site plan is approved. Minor site surface preparation and normal
maintenance shall be allowed prior to submittal and approval of the final site plan,
including excavation and footing preparation, but NO CONCRETE MAY BE
POURED UNTIL A BUILDING PERMIT IS OBTAINED.
Section 18.34.130, upon submitting the final site plan for approval by the Planning
Director, and prior to the issuance of a building permit, applicant shall also submit a
written narrative outlining how each of the above conditions of approval and code
provisions have been satisfied or met.
Section 18.38.050.F, “Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment,” all mechanical
equipment shall be screened. Rooftop equipment should be incorporated into the
roof form and ground mounted equipment shall be screened with walls, fencing or
plant materials.
Section 18.42.150, “Lighting,” all proposed site and building lighting shall comply
with said Section requirements.
Section 18.44.100, “Street Vision Triangle,” at the intersection of each driveway or
alley with a street, no fence, wall or planting > 30” above the street centerline grades,
shall be permitted in the street vision triangle.
Chapter 18.46, “Parking,” all proposed parking design affiliated with the project shall
comply with said Chapter requirements.
Section 18.48.050, “Mandatory Landscaping Provisions,” all proposed landscaping
shall comply with said Section requirements.
Section 18.64.100, “Building Permit Requirements,” a Building Permit must be
obtained prior to the work, and must be obtained within one year of final site plan
approval. Building Permits will not be issued until the final site plan is approved.
Section 18.64.110, “Permit Issuance,” states that no permit or license shall be issued
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 9
unless the use, arrangement and construction have been set forth in such approved
plans and applications.
Engineering
The Final Site Plan shall be adequately dimensioned. A complete legend of all line types
used shall also be provided.
Sewer and water services shall be shown on the Final Site Plan and approved by the
Water/Sewer Superintendent. City of Bozeman applications for service shall be completed
by the applicant. All trees must be at least 10 feet from any public utilities or service lines.
Public utilities and services lines must be shown on the Final Landscaping plan.
Drive approach and public street intersection sight triangles shall be free of plantings which
at mature growth will obscure vision within the sight triangle.
Typical curb details (i.e., raised and/or drop curbs) and typical asphalt paving section detail
shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Concrete curbing shall be provided
around the entire new parking lot perimeter and adequately identified on the Final Site Plan.
The applicant shall submit a construction route map dictating how materials and heavy
equipment will travel to and from the site in accordance with section 18.74.020.A.1 of the
Unified Development Ordinance. This shall be submitted as part of the final site plan for site
developments, or with the infrastructure plans for subdivisions. It shall be the responsibility
of the applicant to ensure that the construction traffic follows the approved routes.
All construction activities shall comply with section 18.74.020.A.2 of the Unified
Development Ordinance. This shall include routine cleaning/sweeping of material that is
dragged to adjacent streets. The City may require a guarantee as allowed for under this
section at any time during the construction to ensure any damages or cleaning that are
required are complete. The developer shall be responsible to reimburse the City for all costs
associated with the work if it becomes necessary for the City to correct any problems that are
identified.
C. Conformance with all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations;
The proposal conforms to all other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations. At the time of
final site plan submittal, the materials are further evaluated against the requirements of the
International Building Code at the time application is made for a Building Permit.
D. Relationship of site plan elements to conditions both on and off the property;
Both houses are located to supply front yard areas to the north, along College Street, and rear
yard areas to the south. Staff is supportive of supplying the rear yards for both houses on the
same side of the lot. The pattern of rear yards to the south is consistent with the existing house
pattern further west on College Street.
The detached garages are permitted to encroach into the required rear yards per the Unified
Development Ordinance as long as they are less than 600 square feet in building footprint size.
E. The impact of the proposal on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions;
Both houses are proposed as two-bedroom and supply two off-street parking spaces. Staff
doesn’t anticipate the proposal as creating a parking congestion problem.
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 10
F. Pedestrian and vehicular ingress and egress;
Private sidewalks are proposed for both houses. Staff is requiring the private sidewalk to House
A to lead to the entry porch.
G. Landscaping, including the enhancement of buildings, the appearance of vehicular use,
open space, and pedestrian areas, and the preservation or replacement of natural
vegetation;
Protection measures shall be put into place to protect the existing boulevard trees on South Grand
Avenue and West College Street if there is going to be construction within their root zones.
Standard tree protection measure including orange, 4’ high barrier fencing installed at each tree’s
drip line shall be instituted for all trees to be protected.
H. Open space;
Not applicable as rear yards are supplied for both houses.
I. Building location and height;
No change in height occurs when House A is moved and reoriented on site.
Staff supports the proposed building height of 28’-4”. The height is appropriate for the
neighboring one-story buildings to the south and west and the surrounding one and one-and-one-
half story structures in the Bon Ton Historic District.
Both houses are located to supply front yard areas to the north, along College Street, and rear
yard areas to the south. Staff is supportive of supplying the rear yards for both houses on the
same side of the lot. The pattern of rear yards to the south is consistent with the existing house
pattern further west on College Street.
J. Setbacks;
The existing house supplies an 8-foot yard setback along College Street. Given the existing
residential development further west on College Street, Planning Staff is supportive of a reduction
of the 20-foot front yard setback to 15 feet. House A provides a 15’-7” front yard setback and
House B provides a 15’-0” front yard setback, with a small additional 4’-0” encroachment with
the window well and landscaped planter. Planning Staff finds the front yard encroachment for
both houses as more historically appropriate for the surrounding residential development. The
reduction of encroachment of 8’-0” to 11’-0” for the house closest to the corner is an
improvement for site.
All side and rear yard setbacks are supplied.
K. Lighting;
Design details for any and all proposed light fixtures are required with the final site plan
submittal.
L. Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities;
Provisions for utilities, including efficient public services and facilities are addressed by
Engineering Staff’s conditions of approval and code provisions.
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 11
M. Site surface drainage and stormwater control;
Provisions for site surface drainage are addressed by Engineering Staff’s conditions of approval
and code provisions.
N. Loading and unloading areas;
The drive apron, drop curb, and concrete driveway shall be replaced with standard curb/gutter,
sidewalk, and boulevard.
O. Grading;
All proposed grading plans are reviewed by Planning, Engineering and Building Department
Staff at time of final site plan submittal, to ensure the construction site is confined to its property
lines.
P. Signage;
Not applicable.
Q. Screening;
All mechanical equipment must be screened. Ground-mounted equipment shall be screened from
all views by either dense plant material or a solid wall.
R. Overlay district provisions;
The project was reviewed under the Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) Standards, as required
for all projects within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. The Design Review
Board (DRB) shall also comment on the project in regards to the COA standards.
S. Other related matters, including relevant comment from affected parties;
No letters of public comment were received in regards to this formal application.
T. If the development includes multiple lots that are interdependent for circulation or other
means of addressing requirement of this title, whether the lots are either:
a. Configured so that the sale of individual lots will not alter the approved configuration or
use of the property or cause the development to become nonconforming;
b. The subject of reciprocal and perpetual easements or other agreements to which the City
is a party so that the sale of individual lots will not cause one or more elements of the
development to become nonconforming.
Not applicable.
PUBLIC COMMENT
No public comment was received in regards to this proposal. If public comment is received after the
creation of this report, Planning Staff will forward it to the BOA for their consideration.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Staff reviewed the Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness application with deviations, against the
criteria set forth in the Bozeman Municipal Code, including the zoning ordinance known as the Unified
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 12
Development Ordinance (UDO). Based on the evaluation of the criteria and findings by Planning Staff,
conditional approval of the application is recommended.
Conditions of Approval
Planning
1. The applicant shall provide a separate landscape plan depicting both existing and
proposed landscaping on the subject site, for final review by Administrative Design
Review Staff.
2. The applicant shall provide a color palette and sample materials board, for final design
review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff.
3. All new windows proposed for House A shall be changed in design so they are more similar in
style and design of the existing windows (likely awning, casement or picture styles).
4. A glass material/window in the transition area between the flat roof rear wing and the gable roof
front portion of House B shall be included in the design.
5. The private sidewalk for House A shall connect at the entry porch.
6. Scaled building elevations shall be submitted for House A, so it is clear how each elevation
changes with the move on the property.
7. Protection measures shall be put into place to protect the existing boulevard trees on South Grand
Avenue and West College Street if there is going to be construction within their root zones.
Standard tree protection measure including orange, 4’ high barrier fencing installed at each tree’s
drip line shall be instituted for all trees to be protected.
8. An Exhibit of Survey shall be provided with the Final Site Plan and stamped by a Registered
Land Surveyor in the state of Montana. The exhibit boundaries shall be labeled with bearings and
distances and reflect those to be recorded with the Amended Plat subsequently prepared for the
project through use of subdivision exemption. All Final Site Plan boundaries shall match that
shown upon the Exhibit of Survey.
9. Any revised/additional materials as conditioned shall be submitted to the Department of Planning
& Community Development within 30 days from the date of this report for review by Planning
Staff. Once the materials are deemed complete and adequate, your COA certificate (white copy)
and notice (pink copy) will be released for the project.
10. The applicant will submit a written narrative outlining how each of the conditions of approval and
code provisions are, or will be, satisfied.
11. This project shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of
Appropriateness with deviations application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved
drawings shall invalidate the project's approval unless the applicant submits the proposed
modifications for review and approval by the Department of Planning prior to undertaking said
modifications.
Engineering
12. The existing garage onto College Street shall be removed. The drive apron, drop curb, and
concrete driveway shall be replaced with standard curb/gutter, sidewalk, and boulevard.
13. College Street has recently been milled and over-laid. Any proposed street cuts for tapping water
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 13
and sewer service lines will be assessed a street degradation fee.
14. Any existing sidewalk panels that are damaged must be replaced.
Water & Sewer
15. In Accordance with the BMC Section 13.12.322 the Water/Sewer Superintendent is requiring an
inspection of your water service to determine whether the water service has backflow protection
and if such protection is installed that the device is appropriate for the level of use for the facility.
If the service has been found without backflow protection the applicant will have a preventer and
expansion tank installed. If the existing device does not provide adequate protection, the applicant
will be required to replace the preventer with a preventer that is designed to provide adequate
protection. Please call the Water Department’s Backflow specialist @ 582-3200 to arrange an
inspection of the water service.
CONCLUSION
conditional approval
Planning Staff recommends of said Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness
application with deviations for the property located at 801 South Grand Avenue. The proposal is found as
historically appropriate for Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District.
BECAUSE THIS APPLICATION IS FOR A SITE PLAN AND CERTIFICATE OF
APPROPRIATENESS WITH DEVIATIONS, THE BOZEMAN BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SHALL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS APPLICATION. THE DECISION OF THE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MAY BE APPEALED BY AN AGGRIEVED PERSON AS SET
FORTH IN CHAPTER 18.66 OF THE BOZEMAN UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE.
Assuming the Board of Adjustment grants conditional approval, any revised/additional materials as
conditioned shall be submitted to the Department of Planning & Community Development within 30 days
from the date of this report for review by Planning Staff. Once the materials are deemed complete and
adequate, your COA certificate (white copy) and notice (pink copy) will be released for the project.
Encl: Applicant’s Submittal Materials
CC: Jeri Rudolf, 801 South Grand Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715
Intrinsik Architecture, 111 North Tracy Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715
#Z-09154 Rudolf Residences SP/COA/DEV Staff Report 14