HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-16-12 Springhill update memo and attachment A
community planning zoning subdivision review annexation historic preservation neighborhood planning urban design GIS
CITY OF BOZEMAN
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building
20 East Olive Street
P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230
phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263
planning@bozeman.net
www.bozeman.net
MEMORANDUM
TO: BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION FROM: DAVE SKELTON, SENIOR PLANNER DUSTIN JOHNSON, PROJECT ENGINEER
RE: SPRINGHILL PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/MASTER SITE PLAN – #Z12254
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The purpose of this memorandum is update the Bozeman City Commission regarding the Conditional Use Permit with Master Site Plan Application for the Springhill Presbyterian Church located at 4769
West Babcock Street lying northwest of the intersection of West Babcock Street and North 19th Avenue.
Since the writing of the staff report for this project, the City Engineer’s Office and Planning Department
have been working with the applicant’s representatives to clarify the intent of a few of the
recommended conditions of approval to be considered by the City Commission on November 19, 2012. This stems from concerns identified by the applicant’s representatives and building committee during
the Development Review Committee (DRC) review of the project and preparation of draft conditions to
be included in the staff report. While the applicant’s representative advised City staff approximately
three weeks ago that the applicant’s concerns with the recommended DRC conditions were generally
workable, it is clear that many of building committee members still have concerns. As a result, this past week City staff has discussed said recommended conditions with the applicant’s building committee and
clarified and/or modified some of those conditions recommended in the City Commission staff report.
Attached please find a summary review of the recommended conditions that the applicant has concerns
with as of this week and staff’s response provided in bold, red font (see Attachment “A”). Based on
these comments we believe the only outstanding item that is still unresolved is City Engineer’s condition #18. Note that the criterion for this condition, and other related conditions are based on provisions of
the Bozeman Municipal Code that include, but are not limited to Section 38.19.100 - Plan Review
Criteria, Section 38.19.110 - Conditional Use Permit and Article 24, BMC – Transportation Facilities
and Access.
In considering applications for plan approval, the advisory and decision-making bodies shall consider criteria where impacts of the proposed project on the existing and anticipated traffic and parking
conditions, pedestrian and vehicular circulation have been mitigated. Section 38.24.010 – Streets,
further emphasizes the need for implementation of streets within a proposed development that provides
for the continuation of streets through a development, as well as between and adjacent to developed and
undeveloped lands based their relationship to provide public convenience and safety, proposed uses, and existing street network. Based on these criteria, the City Engineer’s Office and Planning Department
recognize the need to satisfy these criteria at this time with condition #18 while avoiding immediate
expense and performance by the applicant with their initial phase of the project.
Page 2
As a last effort to fine tune the recommended conditions and further discuss condition #18 with the
applicant’s representatives, the City Engineer’s Office, Planning Department and the applicant’s
representative Madison Engineering, Inc., have recommended that the applicant table this item before
the City Commission on November 19, 2012 to allow for one final opportunity to consider the remaining condition(s) prior to the public hearing. This is further recommended based on the potential
that only three members of the City Commission may be present next Monday, which will require a 3-0
majority vote for an affirmative action on the matter.
Any updates that staff may receive from the applicant or have to offer prior to next Monday’s meeting
will be forwarded to the Commission immediately upon receipt. Feel free to contact me in the Planning Office if you have any questions regarding the application in general or the findings provided in the staff
report.
DS/dps
Attachment: Staff Response to Applicant’s Conditions of Concern – Attachment “A”
cc: Greg & Susan Gianforte, 1320 Manley Road, Bozeman, MT 59715
Springhill Presbyterian Church, #7 West Main Street, Suite 205, Bozeman, MT 59715
Madison Engineering, 895 Technology Blvd Suite 203, Bozeman, MT 59718 Richard Hixson, City Engineer
Craig Woolard, Director of Public Service
Tim McHarg, Planning Director
Page 1 of 7
Attachment “A”
Conditions of Concern Identified by Applicant
Updated November 15, 2012
Planning Department Recommended Conditions:
1. Project phasing shall be clearly defined on the Final Site Plan and infrastructure plans and
specifications including installation of infrastructure. Any proposed phasing of public
infrastructure must be reviewed and approved by the City engineering office. Each phase must
address paving, drainage, access and other site improvements independently prior to occupancy. Response: Acknowledged
2. All landscape islands within the interior of the off-street parking lot shall be properly
landscaped with 75% live vegetation, exclusive of the trees required under Sec Article 26, BMC. Response: Acknowledged
3. No parking space may be located more than 90 feet from the trunk of a tree, or not more than
10 off-street parking spaces without a landscape island. The site plan will need to be revised to reflect the landscape island shown on the landscape plan located nearest the main entrance of the
church.
Response: Per section 38.26.050.C.2.e.2 the required spacing between landscape islands
is 100 feet, not 10 parking spaces. Staff Comment: The intent of the condition was to verify which plan was correct --- site
plan or landscape plan? If you compare the site plan (page C1.0) to the landscape plan
(page L1.1) that includes the landscape island, the landscape island is missing on the
site plan. The placement of the island makes sense as it maintains the continuity and vehicular patterns developed by the placement of the landscape islands within the context of the parking lot. Since the first line of the condition is not the issue, it has
been revised to only address the conflict between the site plan and landscape plan.
4. The Final Site Plan shall include a narrative defining the parameters of the Future Resource Center in terms of use, building type, dimensions and height with development of Phase II for
the Master Site Plan.
Response: Acknowledged
5. Adequate snow storage areas must be designated outside the sight triangles and parking lot
landscape islands in areas that are properly sized and located for snow storage whereby they do
not conflict with the landscape features required with the landscape islands, but on the subject
property (unless a snow storage easement is obtained for a location off the property and filed
with the County Clerk and Recorder's office).
Page 2 of 7
Response: Acknowledged
6. The landscape plan shall be revised to provide screening of the off-street parking areas from the public way along the north side of Automotive Drive as outlined in Section 38.26.050.C,
BMC.
Response: Automotive Way runs North-South and perpendicular to the Babcock Street
public right of way. Please clarify. Staff Comment: Finding that the City Engineer’s condition #18 has been modified to eliminate the requirement that Automotive Drive is to continue west as a local street to
the west end of the parking lot for phase one, screening of the off-street parking lot is
not required at this time. Should condition #18 be adopted based on the revised language provided below, this condition is no longer necessary. However, this condition may reoccur with future development as part of a subdivision, site plan or rearrangement of the site with future development.
7. The site plan shall provide at least two additional pedestrian walkways with appropriate crosswalks through the off-street parking lots for adequate access to the community center and
the site plan revised accordingly for review and approval.
Response: We see no reason for two pedestrian walkways between the main building
and the Resource Center (I am assuming you are calling the resource center a community center, which it is not.) We are proposing one pedestrian walkway between the main building and resource center. The parking and driveway spacing between the south property line and the Cascade Street alignment just fits. There is
no room to add another pedestrian sidewalk without eliminating a row of parking.
Staff Comment: This condition has nothing to do with the resource center ---- the intent is to get at least one if not two more pedestrian walkways “through” the west parking lot area during phase one. Primarily in the area of the larger landscape islands. We have
looked at least 2-3 options for pedestrian circulation through the parking lot for
consideration.
8. The applicant shall provide a color and materials palette, and the exterior elevations revised
to clearly specify and call out each of the components of the color and materials palette
submitted with the final site plan application.
Response: Acknowledged
9. A public trail as recommended by the Gallatin Valley Land Trust with this application will
be constructed with phase two of the project and located in a 25’ wide public access easement as
part of any existing trail extending from the Petra Academy southward and adjacent to the wetlands mitigation boundary. A Class II trail per the construction specifications in Appendix C
of the 2007 PROST Plan shall be provided for this corridor.
Page 3 of 7
Response: It is our understanding this trail exists, as part of the trail system constructed
in the Baxter Springs park and wetland complex, located to the west of the property.
Staff Comment: GVLT notes that the trail does not exist at this time (as of two months ago), only in the form of a pathway from local foot traffic. While the plats do not show a public access easement in this part of the corridor it has been determined that the
southern panhandle of the wetlands areas was dedicated with the Bronken Park
dedication. Therefore, the 25-foot easement is not necessary. Recommend you contact Gary Vodehnal with GVLT to discuss participation in improving this section of the trail southward. Where is Baxter Springs park or are you talking about Bronken Park?
10. 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.
Response: Acknowledged
City Engineer Recommended Conditions:
11. Project phasing shall be clearly defined on the Final Site Plan and infrastructure plans and
specifications including installation of infrastructure. Any proposed phasing of public
infrastructure must be reviewed and approved by the City engineering office. Each phase must address paving, drainage, access and other site improvements independently prior occupancy.
Response: Acknowledged
12. At this time the lot being proposed for this development has not paid cash-in-lieu of water rights. Prior to development cash-in-lieu of water rights will be required to be paid. The
applicant is required to produce an estimate for the annual water consumption for the facility at
full build out. This water consumption rate will be reviewed by the Engineering Department to
determine the final amount for cash-in-lieu of water rights.
Response: Acknowledged
13. A detailed Traffic Impact Study for the proposed development, including a level of service
evaluation, shall be provided. Response: Acknowledged
14. Based on recent decisions by the City of Bozeman City Commission, the East half of
Cottonwood Road is not required to be constructed with the initial phase of development of this
project. Any future phases of this development that demonstrate impact on Cottonwood Road will result in requirements that improvements to the road be completed prior to future building
permits.
Response: Any future development will impact Cottonwood to some degree. Does this
Page 4 of 7
condition state that Phase II will automatically trigger the east half of Cottonwood to be constructed along our frontage or does it imply that on-site development that impacts
Cottonwood to the extent that improvements are required would trigger the condition?
Staff Comment: There will be no broad conditions of approval with this application that will require (or not require) improvements to Cottonwood Road for future phases. The intent is to review each phase of this development independently. At the time of phase
II, or future phases beyond phase II, it will be determined if the proposed development
is significant enough to require a traffic study. If the traffic study determines that Cottonwood Road operates at an unacceptable standard or the proposed development would significantly impact the standard of operation of the road requirements for improvement would be determined at that time.
15. Unless currently filed with the property, the applicant shall provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of SIDs for Street
improvements to Cottonwood Road including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, storm drainage, and
intersection improvements at Cottonwood Road/Durston Road and Cottonwood Road/Huffine
Lane.
Response: We assume the City will prepare these documents for execution.
Staff Comment: The City will provide the applicant a copy of the standard Waiver of
Right to Protest for them to fill out the proper titles, legal descriptions, and other
details. The applicant will provide a draft of the document to the City to verify the document fulfills the conditions of approval. Once the document is finalized the applicant will sign, execute, and record the document at the clerk and recorders and provide a copy of the recorded document to the City.
16. The proposed Cascade Street shall be constructed to include full boulevard sidewalk (with boulevard trees) and the full roadway from back of curb to back of curb with a 60 foot public
street easement. The street design must be submitted, reviewed, and accepted by the City
Engineering department prior to any construction and issuance of building permits.
The extension must line up directly with the existing portion of the street to the east of
Cottonwood Road. Any realignment of the street from what is currently platted for the property must be reviewed and approved by the City Engineering Department.
Response: We acknowledge this condition and request that the sidewalks, adjacent the
Baxter Ditch crossing, to be curbside walks to reduce the impact to the wetlands
area. In addition, we request that only the sidewalk on the south side be required until such time as the remainder of Cascade Street to the north is constructed. The north walk would basically go nowhere if constructed before the north Cascade section.
We also request that the parking setback, from the 60 foot wide easement, be reduced to 5’ for the adjacent parking stalls. Typically this would be 15 feet and if imposed would eliminate a row of parking proposed for Phase II.
Page 5 of 7
Staff Comment: City Engineering has reviewed the proposed alignment and design
provided by the applicant for the crossing of the Baxter Ditch for the Cascade Street
extension. Preliminarily, it would seem reasonable to allow a short segment of curb walk for the ditch crossing in order to reduce the impact to the wetlands. City Engineering has discussed a few scenarios with the applicants engineering representative and it appears that an agreeable solution can be met. The final
alignment and design will be reviewed and approved at the time of infrastructure
submittal.
17. With this phase of development Cascade Street shall be constructed from Cottonwood Road
to the point in which the proposed alignment will turn north. A 60 foot public street easement
will be required for the portion of Cascade Street that will run north to the property line with
Petra Academy to tie into the public street easement for Cascade Street that has previously been recorded with the Petra Academy development. The portions of Cascade Street that runs north
and then west along the property boundary with Petra Academy will not be required to be
constructed until a future phase of development when it is determined to be necessary.
Response: We acknowledge this condition and request clarification on what the City considers to be necessary? With regards to your “future phase” would this be Phase II or the future phases as shown on the site plan, west of Phase I? We suggest a traffic study would be used as the vehicle to determine the “necessary”.
Staff Comment: Similar to the response provided for condition 14 above, no requirements to build or not build Cascade Street will be provided with this review for future phases of development for this site. City staff agrees that future phases of significant development will require traffic studies and these future traffic studies will be used to
determine whether the improvements to Cascade will be required with that phase of
development.
18. Automotive Drive from Babcock Street northward to its intersection with the east-west
driveway the western most drive access for the parking lot proposed for phase I shall be
constructed in the initial phase of the project. It shall be constructed to a full local street
standard. A public street easement (60 feet wide) will be required for this extension. The sidewalk on the east side of the north-south running segment of the street will not be required
with this phase of development.
Curb, gutter, and sidewalk will be provided on the side of the street that Automotive Drive
borders the proposed development. At the point of the primary entrance of this development Automotive Drive will continue west
and eventually wrap around to connect to the northern portion of Cascade Street along the north
properly line with Petra Academy. A public street easement (60 feet wide) will be required for
this extension, but the street will not be required to be constructed until a future phase of development when it is determined to be necessary.
Page 6 of 7
The landowner will execute an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for a 60 foot wide Street and Utility Easement for the future connection between Babcock Street and Cascade
Street. The Irrevocable Offer shall be worded such that the offer remains in effect
regardless of transfer of ownership of the land. This Irrevocable Offer will ensure the opportunity to expand the local street network with further development of the site is not inhibited. The future alignment of the easement subject to the Irrevocable Offer may or may not utilize Automotive Drive. At the time of consideration of each future phase of
development of the property within the Master Site Plan, the location and timing of
installation of the actual street will be evaluated and if determined by the City to be needed shall be installed. The Irrevocable Offer shall be reviewed and approved by the City and recorded with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder prior to Final Site Plan approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Master Site Plan Z-12254. Depending upon the
conclusions of the City after conducting the review of future phases the Irrevocable Offer
may be released upon mutual agreement of the land owner(s) and the City. In lieu of an Irrevocable Offer the applicant may prepare and execute an agreement with the City of Bozeman that specifically outlines the details, time schedule and specifications for implement of a local street.
Response: We agree to construct the north-south drive from Babcock to the parking lot with Phase I to full local street standards, with a boulevard and sidewalk on the
west side, and provide a public street easement to the beginning of the parking lot.
To align the drive with Automotive Way, to the south, approximately 6.5 feet of the
easement will need to be located on the adjacent property to the east. Springhill Church would provide the portion of easement that would be on the Church property at this time and then when the adjacent property develops they would
provide the remainder of the 60’ wide easement. We propose that no sidewalk is
required on the east side of the roadway, with this or any future development, and
the parking setback from the easement lines be reduced to 5 feet from the standard 15 feet.
With regards to the remainder of the drive it is unknown at this time where the
potential west and northern drive will be eventually be located. We propose that the
location of any future drives, outside of the Phase I & II boundary be dealt with with future application(s).
Staff Comment: This condition may be amended as provided above such that Automotive
Drive will be constructed to a local City street standard, northward to is terminus with the east-west parking lot driveway, with the additional language provided above requiring the applicant to execute an Irrevocable Offer of Dedication for a 60 foot wide Street and Utility Easement or Agreement with the City for the future
connection between Babcock Street and Cascade Street.
19. No private drive accesses will be permitted onto Cottonwood Road.
Response: Acknowledged
Page 7 of 7
20. Any dead end street or access that extends longer than 150 feet must provide an adequate
emergency turn-around that is approved by the Bozeman Fire Department.
Response: Acknowledged
21. An all-weather emergency access drive will be constructed to connect Cascade Street to the
parking lot proposed with this development. A paved drive apron shall be constructed the first
75 feet of the emergency access drive starting at the intersection of Cascade Street. Adequate
signage will be provided along the emergency access drive restricting non-emergency traffic or parking.
Response: Acknowledged