Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutdoc20100917074947 SUSAN B. SWIMLEY 1807 West Dickerson, #B Bozeman MT 59715 Attorney and Counselor At Law Phone: (406) 586-5544 Facsimile: (406) 586-3130 TRANSMITTAL September 17, 2010 TO: Brian Krueger HAND-DELIVERED Bozeman City Planning Re: Mitchell Development- Kohl's PLEASE: [ ] Please File or Record [ ] Per your request [ ] Present to the Judge [ ] Please provide [ ] Return a conformed copy [x] For your information [ ] Call for an appointment [ ] Payment enclosed [ ] Review, sign and return [ ] Thank You! ENCLOSURE: 15 Copies of the Applicant's Response to DRB Recommended Conditions. Sincerely, Susan E. Carroll Legal Assistant to Susan B. Swimley Enclosures Design Review Board (DRB) Recommended Conditions: 1. The building shall be designed and constructed as a LEED building or equivalent certification or program approved by the City of Bozeman. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Kohl's will respond to this recommended condition at the City Commission meeting on September 20, 2010. 2. The building shall have a significant field (>30% rooftop area) of rooftop photovoltaic solar panels installed to generate on site power or equivalent as approved by the City of Bozeman. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Kohl's will respond to this recommended condition at the City Commission meeting on September 20, 2010. 3. The building shall earn the Energy Star label or equivalent certification or program approved by the City of Bozeman. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Kohl's will respond to this recommended condition at the City Commission meeting on September 20, 2010. 4. The final landscape plan shall incorporate additional urban landscape / streetscape features along the north and east facades of the building. Examples of appropriate features include seating walls, raised planters, enhanced bollards, public art installations, expanded and more detailed landscape planting beds, or other innovative urban landscape architecture. APPLICANT RESPONSE: The most recent elevations submitted by Kohl's on September 10, 2010 incorporate seating areas and planting features on the north (entrance) fagade of the building. Beyond these features, the Applicant does not accept this recommended condition. Pursuant to Section 18.48.020B.2. of the UDO, sites within a PUD approved with a PUD landscaping plan are not subject to the landscaping requirements of the LIDO. The Bozeman Gateway PUD was approved with an extensive landscaping plan. The landscaping plan submitted with the Kohl's application exceeds the landscaping requirements for the Bozeman Gateway PUD. Further, Mitchell Development Group has agreed to install the landscaping for Open Space 7 which is part of Phase IV of the PUD. Kohl's is in Phase ll of the PUD and the landscaping of Open Space 7 would not be required until Phase IV is platted. 5. The southernmost pedestrian crosswalk across the loading area access shall be removed from the final site plan. The plaza area and proposed curb-walk within Open Space 7 shall be relocated to the west side of the north/south trail. In lieu of the pedestrian crossing, a raised planter with trellis, vines, and other vertical plantings shall be provided along the length of the west side of the loading area screen wall. 1 � � APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant accepts the condition to remove the southernmost pedestrian crosswalk across the loading area access. Interestingly, this condition is what Applicant originally proposed and Planning insisted that applicant had to have the southernmost pedestrian crosswalk. Applicant does not accept the remaining portion of the condition and instead proposes that the condition be amended as follows: The southernmost pedestrian crosswalk across the loading area shall be removed from the final site plan. The plaza area and proposed curb-walk within Open Space 7 shall be relocated to the west side of the north/south trail. The loading area wall will be modified with a masonry end cap as indicated by the most recent elevations submitted by Kohl's on September 10, 2010. 6. Two benches, as specified by the Bozeman Gateway Design Manual, shall be provided at the primary entrance. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. 7. Rooftop equipment shall be incorporated into the roof form or screened in an enclosure and ground mounted equipment shall be screened with walls, fencing or plant materials. A scaled exhibit shall be submitted with the final site plan approval demonstrating how the Roof Top Units (RTUs) will be adequately screened by the parapet wall of the building or a screen enclosure. If a screen enclosure is required a construction detail of the screen shall be provided with the final site plan. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. Kohl's most recent elevations submitted to the Planning Department on September 10, 2010 outline the location of the roof top equipment which are clearly screened. 8. The applicant shall develop a security lighting plan for each site as part of the final site plan submittal detailing which lights are proposed to be left on between the hours of 11 pm and 6 am for security purposes (otherwise, code requires all lighting to be turned off between said hours). APPLICANT RESPONSE: Kohl's will respond to this recommended condition at the City Commission meeting on September 20, 2010. 9. The final site plan application shall return to the Design Review Board for approval prior to final site plan approval. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant does not accept this condition. The Design Review Board is a citizen advisory board which is not authorized to give final site plan approval. Final site plan approval, per UDO § 18.62.010(A)(2) the DRB is advisory only and have no final review authority. The Planning Director can determine compliance for final site plan without the DRB and avoid unnecessary delay. 21 . Planning Recommended Conditions: 10. Lots 21-25 and the Common Area 6 lot shall be aggregated and/or the common boundaries of said lots shall be reconfigured through the applicable subdivision review process to accommodate the project prior to final site plan approval. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted with the understanding that the subdivision review process includes the exemption process. 11. A revised, signed, and notarized improvements agreement and financial guarantee for all remaining Phase 2 subdivision improvements, not including those required to be installed with the site plan, shall be submitted prior to final site plan approval. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant does not object to this condition but wants to ensure that Applicant's right to bond site plan improvements is not limited by the condition as written. Applicant under the UDO has the option to bond for the site plan improvements. 12. The landscaping and shared pathway improvements for PUD Subdivision Open Space #6 and #7 shall be installed concurrent with this site plan. The trail system and associated landscaping within Common area 4 and 7 shall be installed concurrent with this site plan. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted on the basis that the landscaping to be installed will be removed and then reinstalled when the Common Area 4 parking lot and adjacent lots are constructed; therefore, the landscaping installed will be 26 feet in width, ten feet of grass/landscaping rock on each side of the trail, with a tree installed every 50 feet on alternating sides of the trail for an overall length of approximately 200 feet. 13. A construction management plan shall be provided that clearly delineates the limits of construction, construction staging areas, and addresses weed control/reseeding on disturbed ground including a long term weed management plan for all areas disturbed. No stockpiles of topsoil, pit-run or other materials shall remain on or in the vicinity of the site after construction of the building. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted with the caveat that topsoil, pit- run or other materials will not be stored north of the proposed Technology Boulevard West. 14. Barrier fencing or an approved alternative shall be provided along all edges of the access driveways and parking areas that do not include curb and gutter until future construction commences on the adjacent lots. A proposed fencing/barrier detail shall be provided for review and approval with the final site plan. 3 ( APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted with the caveat that the last sentence of the condition should read.. A proposed fencing barrier or approved alternative detail shall be provided for review and approval with the final site plan. 15. All building mounted lighting shall be noted and shown on the final building elevations and incorporated into the photometric plan to be submitted with the final site plan. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. 16. The northernmost drive aisle to the west of the site shall be removed from the final site plan. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant does not accept this condition. At week 2 DRC, held on September 1, 2010 DRC staff indicated that it would recommend removal of this drive aisle to avoid "unfinished, incomplete"improvements and referred to this 27'wide asphalt surfaced aisle as "substandard". At the same meeting Planning Staff stated that "pedestrian connectivity could be satisfied by construction of the trail and completion of the corridor." In response to Week 2 DRC, applicant submitted this justification: The northerly driveway is for conductivity to the balance of the development. It reduces traffic on Main Street and offers a different ingress/egress opportunity for the PUD. Mitchell Development is in negotiations currently with a potential user of the northerly driveway. The driveways remain privately owned and maintained until further development occurs within Phase 2 of the Bozeman Gateway PUD. These private driveways are a location for the existing utilities. Both will be fully improved as adjacent lots develop. In the meantime the roadways cause no burden to the City. At week 3 DRB on September 8, 2010 staff recommended a condition to remove the northerly drive aisle as it was a hazard for pedestrians because it didn't offer any pedestrian facilities. The same staff recommendation was provided to DRB. Pedestrian facilities are being provided and maintained 12 months a year to allow for foot and bicycle traffic in a parallel trail. The proposed paved aisle is 27' wide in the location where utilities are already installed and which is now a gravel access road previously required by the City. Applicant is obligated to maintain the aisle. Applicant has mitigated all safety concerns 17. That the applicant upon submitting the Final Site Plan for approval by the Planning Director and prior to issuance of a building permit, will also submit a written narrative outlining how each of the conditions of approval and code provisions have been satisfied. 41 , t APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant accepts the condition in so far as it will submit a written narrative outlining how each condition of approval has been met. Applicant assumes that the reference in Condition 17 is to the "Planning Code Provisions"and "Engineering Code Provisions"on page 7-10 of City Commission Staff Report by Brian Krueger, Associate Planner. If so, Applicant objects to "Planning Code Provisions"1) and m) on the basis that pursuant to Section 18.48.020B.2. of the UDO, sites within a PUD approved with a PUD landscaping plan are not subject to the landscaping requirements of the UDO. The Bozeman Gateway PUD was approved with an extensive landscaping plan. The landscaping plan submitted with the Kohl's application exceeds the landscaping requirements for the Bozeman Gateway PUD. Engineering Recommended Conditions: 18. The substandard level of service at the intersection of College Street and 23rd Avenue shall be mitigated unless a variance is granted by the City Commission. Construction of the improvements required to mitigate the level of service shall be installed and accepted prior to issuance of a building permit, unless all of the requirements of 18.74.030.C.1.b are met to allow for concurrent construction. If the requirements for concurrent construction are met, all improvements shall be installed and accepted prior to occupancy of any structure. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant does not accept this condition. Applicant requested a variance for the level of service for the intersection of College Street and 23rd Avenue. The City has failed to identify what improvements will be required for mitigation if the variance is not granted. 19. Temporary drainage easements shall be granted for all temporary storm water facilities, i.e. ponds, swales, etc. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. 20. The storm water plan shall address how water quality treatment will be accomplished on the proposed 30" bypass/overflow main since it is not being routed through the storage facility. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. 21. The storm water plan shall address how water is being routed to the temporary ponds. Currently no ditches/swales are shown. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Condition Accepted. Fire/Building Recommended Conditions: 5 ( 22. There shall be no tenant use of the building; including public access; merchandise stocking; on site employee interviews, training, or orientations; prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building. The City may allow the installation of racks, shelving, and other display fixtures prior to occupancy, but only with the approval of the Building Division and Fire Department. APPLICANT RESPONSE: Applicant proposes the following condition: "There shall be no tenant use of the building, including public access, merchandise stocking, on site employee interviews, training, or orientations, prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building. Upon approval of the Building Division and Fire Department, the City will allow the installation of racks, shelving, and other display fixtures prior to occupancy." 6