HomeMy WebLinkAboutMeadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application, P13046_15Page 1 of 36
P13046, Staff Report for the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision
Public Hearing Dates: City Commission meeting is on March 3, 2014
Project Description: A preliminary plat for a major subdivision to further subdivide 13 existing
lots to create 42 single-household residential lots with a variance from Section 38.23.100,
B.M.C., wetland setback standards.
Project Location: The project is generally located at the intersection of Goldeneye Drive and
South 27th Avenue. The property is legally described as the Amended Plat of Lots 8-15,
Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 located in the
Southeast One-Quarter (SE ¼) of Section 23, Township Two South (T2S), Range Five
East (R5E), P.M.M. Gallatin County.
Recommendation: Approval with conditions
Recommended Motions:
Recommended Motion for Variance Request: “Having reviewed the application
materials, considered public comment, and the staff analysis, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for P13046 and move to approve the requested variance to
Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code Section 38.23.100.A.2.c, to allow the
encroachment into the required wetland setback.”
Recommended Motion for Preliminary Plat Application: “Having reviewed and
considered the application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application P13046 and move
to approve the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Phase I Subdivision with conditions and
subject to all applicable code provisions.”
Report Date: Tuesday, February 25, 2014
Staff Contact: Tom Rogers, Associate Planner
Engineer: Dustin Johnson
Agenda Item Type: Action (Quasi-judicial)
195
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 2 of 36
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unresolved Issues
There are no known unresolved issues at this time.
Project Summary
The property owner DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue, Suite 4, Bozeman, MT
59718, represented by DOWL HKM, 2090 Stadium Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 submitted
application to further subdivide or replat 13 existing lots with the Meadow Creek Subdivision to
create 42 single-household residential lots with open space and right-of-rays. This will create 42
dwelling units as opposed to the originally planned 89. Parkland will be provided by existing
park areas dedicated with the original Meadow Creek subdivision. The newly created lots will
be required to be added to the existing property owners association (POA) and provide their fair
share of park and other related maintenance activities performed by the POA.
The original plat intended the existing 13 lots as multi-household development. These lots
would have required further review prior to development. Although there is no change in the
exterior boundaries of the subdivision the new configuration triggers Section 38.23.100, B.M.C.,
necessitating the variance request from wetland setback requirements. The variance request
applies to Lots 7 – 10 in Block 1 as they require a variance from the 50 foot wetland setback
requirement. As stated in the Applicant Submittal the minimum requested setback is 35.3 feet
with an average along Lots 7 – 10 of approximately 45 feet.
Alternatives
1. Approve the application with the recommended conditions;
2. Approve the application with modifications to the recommended conditions;
3. Deny the application based on the Commission’s findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff
or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
196
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 3 of 36
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 2
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .......................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES ............................................................................... 10
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL .......................................... 10
SECTION 4 - CODE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRING PLAT CORRECTIONS ...................... 15
SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ............................................ 15
SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS and findings .......................................................................... 17
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.03.040, BMC................................. 17
Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608 ................................................. 18
Preliminary Plat Supplements ........................................................................................... 21
Zoning Variance Review Criteria, Section 38.35.060, BMC ........................................... 27
APPENDIX A –ADVISORY CODE CITATIONS ..................................................................... 29
APPENDIX B – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY ..................................... 32
APPENDIX C – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND.................... 33
APPENDIX D – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ......................................................... 35
APPENDIX E – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ................................. 36
FISCAL EFFECTS ....................................................................................................................... 36
ATTACHEMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 36
197
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 4 of 36
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES
Vicinity Map showing adjacent zoning
Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses
North: Undeveloped land within the Meadow Creek subdivision zoned R-3 (Residential Medium
Density District).
South: Undeveloped land within the Meadow Creek subdivision zoned R-3 (Residential Medium
Density District).
East: Developing within the Meadow Creek subdivision zoned R-3 (Residential Medium
Density District).
West: Developing within the Meadow Creek subdivision zoned R-3 (Residential Medium
Density District) and un-annexed A-S (Agricultural Suburban) lands.
198
Page 5 of 36
199
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION
Page 6 of 36
200
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION
Page 7 of 36
201
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION
Page 8 of 36
202
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION
Page 9 of 36
203
Page 10 of 36
SECTION 2 – REQUESTED VARIANCES
A variance has been requested from the following section as noted in the Executive Summary. A
description is included in the Plat Supplements section of the application.
1) Section 38.23.100.A.2.c(4)(d) Wetland Setbacks – This variance request is addressed
under Section 6 of this report.
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report. These conditions are specific to the planned unit development.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. The final plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC)
and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings
for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required certificates.
The final plat application shall include three (3) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or
heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies; one (1) PDF copy;
and five (5) paper prints.
2. 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 BMC or State law.
3. The applicant shall submit with the application for final plat review and approval, a written
narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval and noted code provisions have been satisfactorily addressed, and shall include a digital copy (pdf) of the
entire final plat submittal. This narrative shall be in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer
to the appropriate plat, plan, sheet, note, covenant, etc. in the submittal.
4. The subdivider shall provide the necessary declaration and recitals creating the property
owner’s association bylaws and/or declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions as being part of the existing Meadow Creek Subdivision property owners association. Any
cost sharing agreements for maintenance shall be included with the final plat.
5. The final plat shall contain the following notation on its face or in a document to be
recorded with the final plat:
“Ownership of all common open space areas and trails, and responsibility of maintenance thereof and for city assessments levied on the common open space lands shall be that of the
property owner’s association. Maintenance responsibility shall include, in addition to the
common open space and trails, all vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees and irrigation
systems in the public right-of-way boulevard strips along all external perimeter
development streets and adjacent to public parks or other common open space areas. All areas within the subdivision that are designated herein as common open space including
204
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 11 of 36
trails are for the use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the general public.
The property owner’s association shall be responsible for levying annual assessments to provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all common open space areas and trails. At the same time of recording the final plat for each phase of the subdivision the subdivider
shall transfer ownership of all common open space areas within each phase to the property
owner’s association created by the subdivider to maintain all common open space areas
within Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision”.
6. Documentation of compliance with the parkland dedication requirements of Section 38.27.020, BMC shall be provided with the final plat. A table showing the parkland
requirements for the subdivision and the method of meeting the parkland dedication shall
be included on the final plat, or other recordable document acceptable to the City of
Bozeman. This table shall include but not be limited to listing all dedicated parkland requirements, parkland or parkland credits and areas not credited towards parkland (i.e., detention/retention areas, watercourse setbacks, wetlands, common open space, parking
facilities) and the total area of each. The applicant shall provide a minimum of 1.26 acres
of dedicated parkland or equivalent thereof with the major subdivision. This amount is
calculated based on 42 single household residential lots at 0.03 acres per dwelling of dedicated parkland. The final plat, property owner’s association documents (POA), and park master plan may not include any reference to “dedicated” open space and Public
Park; rather if the areas designated as such on the preliminary plat are to be common open
space owned by the POA or a park owned by the POA, or a combination thereof the plat,
POA documents and park master plan must specifically designate them as common open space owned by the POA, etc. unless the applicant intends to dedicate public parkland within the subdivision.
7. The subdivision must meet the parkland requirements of Sect. 38.27.020, BMC. The
applicant it seeks to use available parkland credits associated with the dedicated parkland
within Meadow Creek Phase 1, including the dedicated park known as the “Lerner and Ainsworth Parks” and should therefore participate in the maintenance of such parkland. Therefore, the applicant shall, prior to final plat approval, work with the Meadow Creek
Phase 1 Property Owner’s Association (MCPOA) to arrive at an agreed upon method to
ensure the applicant and any future property owner’s association created for this
subdivision (including all its phases) succeeding in interest to the applicant contribute sufficient consideration to the MCPOA on an equitable basis for the maintenance and upkeep of existing publicly dedicated parks and publicly accessible open space lands and
trails located within the subdivision. Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall provide
evidence that an agreed upon method has been established. The agreement may contain a
provision that should the City create a park maintenance district for maintenance of areas subject to the agreement the agreement may terminate.
The property owner’s association documents created for this subdivision shall include
provisions describing the agreed upon method of contribution to the MCPOA and binding
property owners to contribute to the maintenance and upkeep of dedicated parks and
publicly accessible open space lands as required by the agreement between the applicant and the MCPOA. The provisions in the property owner’s association documents fulfilling this condition shall be considered required by the City Commission pursuant to
38.38.030.A.5, BMC.
205
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 12 of 36
8. A pedestrian walk, constructed to City standards, shall be constructed in a 30-foot wide
public access easement constructed in the common open space areas for Block 1 – 4. The final location, placement and installation schedule shall be approved by the Director of the City of Bozeman Department of Parks and Recreation with of the advice of the Recreation
and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB). Prior to proceeding with construction of the public
trail the applicant shall have a pre-construction meeting with the Department of Recreation
and Parks.
9. Section 38.23.130 “Fences, Walls and Hedges” - Fences located in the front, side or rear yard setback of properties adjacent to any park or common open space shall not exceed a
maximum height of 4 feet, and shall be of an open construction designed in a manner to be
consistent along all park land and open space areas. This requirement with appropriate
exhibits of fence types shall be addressed and illustrated in the property owner’s association documents.
10. Section 38.27.070 “Landscaping of Public Lands” – Installation by the developer of
vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees, and irrigation system in the public right-of-way
boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets and adjacent to public
parks or other open space areas is required with the final plat application.
11. A one (1) foot No Access Strip shall be shown on the plat along the entire frontage of South 27th Avenue with the exception of Lot 11, Block 4 to allow the shared access
easement.
12. Final Plat shall show the 30 foot public utility and access easement as depicted on Meadow
Creek Phase plat J-453 as shared access for Lot 13, Block 9. The POA covenants shall include a statement that Lot 11, Block 4 of the Amended plat of Meadow Creek Subdivision is subject to this easement.
13. A note on the Final Plat shall include non-liability statements referenced under Section 85-
7-2212, Mont. Codes Ann. The property owner’s association documents created for this
subdivision shall also reference these provisions.
14. The final plat application for the subdivision shall include typical cross sections for each storm water facility in relation to adjacent subdivision improvements and physical features
(i.e., watercourse, Road A), plans verifying placement of the facility only in Zone II of the
watercourse setback, typical landscape and grading details for each storm water facility,
and landscape plans for each facility outlet. The cross sections shall be approved by the City prior to final plat approval.
15. The final plat shall provide all necessary utility easements and shall be described,
dimensioned and shown on the final plat in their true and correct location. Any rear or side
yard utility easements not provided will require written confirmation from ALL utility
companies providing service indicating that rear or side yard easements are not needed.
16. Section 38.41.080.2.g.9 requires a Stormwater Master Plan for the subdivision for a system designed to remove solids, silt, oils, grease, and other pollutants from the runoff from the
private and public streets and all lots must be provided to and approved by the City
Engineer.
206
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 13 of 36
The master plan must depict the maximum sized retention/detention basin location, and
locate and provide easements for adequate drainage ways within the subdivision to transport runoff to the stormwater receiving channel. The plan shall include sufficient site grading and elevation information (particularly for the basin sites, drainage ways, and lot
finished grades), typical stormwater retention/detention basin and discharge structure
details, basin sizing calculations, and a stormwater maintenance plan.
Any stormwater ponds located within park or open space shall be designed and constructed so as to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the park or open space. Storm water ponds shall not be located on private lots.
Detailed review of the final grading and drainage plan and approval by the City Engineer
will be required as part of the infrastructure plan and specification review process
17. A Storm Water Management Permit (SMP) must be submitted and approved by the City Engineer prior to Preliminary Plat Approval. The SMP requires submittals of an application form and a Storm Water Management Plan in compliance with the City of
Bozeman’s Storm Water Management Ordinance #1763. The SMP is independent of any
other storm water permitting required from the State of Montana, and does not fulfill the
requirement to obtain a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) if they are required for this development.
18. Section 38.23.070 specifies that the Developer's engineer will be required to prepare a
comprehensive design report evaluating existing capacity of water and sewer utilities which
must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. The report must include hydraulic
evaluations of each utility for both existing and post-development demands. The report findings must demonstrate adequate capacity to serve the full development. The report must also identify the proposed phasing of water and sewer construction. If adequate water
and/or sewer capacity is not available for full development, the report must identify
necessary water system and sewer system improvements required for full development.
The Developer will be responsible to complete the necessary system improvements to serve the full development.
All water mains over 500 feet in length must be looped.
19. Section 38.41.080.g.7 requires the location of and distinction between existing and
proposed sewer and water mains and all easements shall be clearly and accurately depicted
on the plans and specs, as well as all nearby fire hydrants and proposed fire hydrants.
20. Section 38.23.060.c specifies any easements needed for the water and sewer main extensions shall be a minimum of 30 feet in width. While the final location of the water and
sewer mains will be determined once the final street widths are approved, in no case shall
the utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of the easement. All necessary easements shall
be provided prior to final plat approval and shall be shown on the plat. Wherever water
and/or sewer mains are not located under or accessed from improved streets, a 12 foot wide all weather access drive shall be constructed above the utilities to provide necessary access.
21. Section 32.23.070 specifies plans and Specifications for water and sewer main extensions,
prepared and signed by a Professional Engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana
shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans shall also
be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant shall
207
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 14 of 36
also provide Professional Engineering services for Construction Inspection, Post-
Construction Certification, and preparation of mylar Record Drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted.
No building permits shall be issued prior to City acceptance of the
required infrastructure improvements unless concurrent construction is
granted.
22. City standard curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be provided along all streets in the
subdivision. Per Chapter 38.24.080 of the UDC sidewalks will be installed prior to occupancy of any individual lots.
23. Street names must be approved by the City Engineer and Gallatin County road office prior
to final plat approval.
24. All streets contained within the subdivision shall be within dedicated public right of way
and built to city standards.
25. The proposed drive access, at the southern portion of the development, shown onto South
27th Avenue does not meet the minimum separation standards outlined in BMC section
38.24.090.D.2 (Table 44-3). If the applicant wishes to utilize these accesses for the
proposed development, they must request a relaxation from the City Engineer. The criteria
for this request is outlined in BMC section 38.24.090.H.3. The preference of City Engineering would be to align this access with the existing alignment of Meah Lane.
26. The location of mailboxes shall be coordinated with the City Engineering Department prior
to their installation.
27. Section 38.41.020 outlines additional permits that may be required beyond what is
administered by the City of Bozeman. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, SCS, Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Army Corps of Engineer’s
shall be contacted regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404,
Turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be obtained prior to plan and specification approval.
28. 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 38.39.020.A.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This shall be submitted as part of the final site plan for
site developments, or with infrastructure plans for subdivisions. It shall be the
responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the construction traffic follows the approved
routes.
29. All construction activities shall comply with section 38.39.020.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.
30. All street lights installed with this subdivision shall use LED light heads.
208
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 15 of 36
SECTION 4 - CODE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRING PLAT CORRECTIONS
A. None have been identified at this time.
SECTION 5 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Project Name: Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Phase 1 preliminary plat
File: P-13046
Development Review Committee
The Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the Preliminary Plat application on
January 15, 22 and 29, 2014. On January 22, 2013, the DRC determined the submittal contained
detailed, supporting information that is sufficient to allow for the review of the proposed
subdivision; and as a result, finds that the application, with conditions, is in general compliance
with the adopted growth policy, the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and the Unified
Development Code. On January 29, 2014, the DRC recommended conditional approval of the
preliminary plat application.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board reviewed the proposed subdivision on January 3,
2014. The Board considered that the proposed is within a previously platted subdivision with
developed parks (Lerner and Ainsworth Parks) that meet the dedication requirement. The only
change to the original approved plat is that some multi-household lots are to be built as single-
household units. This will create 42 dwelling units as opposed to the originally planned 89. In
addition, the net result of this is reduction of dwelling units would be a reduction of the impact
on the parks and the new lots will contribute to park maintenance by joining the existing HOA.
The RPAB found that the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek subdivision would not have adverse
park implications with this request and recommend approval.
Wetlands Review Board
The Wetlands Review Board (WRB) reviewed the application on January 10, 2014. Based on
the information provided, site specific considerations, and mitigation provided the subdivision
design the WRB was supportive of the variance request. The Board found the proposed
encroachment to be reasonable while insuring adequate separation between human activity and
the wetlands. The Board continued by stating it appeared the Applicant provided the additional
information requested during the Pre-Application review necessary form the Board to perform an
adequate review of the project and provide the Commission a positive recommendation on the
project. In conclusion the WRB moved to recommend that the City Commission grant the
setback variance from Section 38.23.100, BMC, the motion passed unanimously (3:0).
209
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 16 of 36
Planning Board
The Planning Board conducted a public hearing on February 18, 2014 on the subdivision and
made a recommendation to the City Commission on the variance request and preliminary plat
application. The Planning Board made a recommendation that the City Commission approve the
requested variance and approve the preliminary plat application with conditions of approval as
described in Planning Board Resolution P14046 which is attached to this report.
City Commission
The City Commission public hearing is scheduled for March 3, 2014 to consider the preliminary
plat and variance request and make a final decision.
210
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 17 of 36
SECTION 6 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials,
municipal codes, standards, and plans, public comment, and all other materials available during
the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis is a
summary of the completed review.
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.03.040, BMC.
In considering applications for subdivision approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following:
1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act
The preliminary plat has been prepared in accordance with the survey requirements of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of
Montana. As noted in recommended condition No. 1, the final plat must comply with State
statute, Administrative Rules of Montana, and the Bozeman Municipal Code.
2) Compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Unified
Development Code (UDC). The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code
provisions that are not specifically listed as a condition 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.
3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of
the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
The hearings before the Planning Board and City Commission have been properly noticed as
required by the Bozeman UDC. Based on the recommendation of the DRC, RPAB, and WRB
and other applicable review agencies, as well as any public testimony received on the matter, the
Planning Board shall forward a recommendation in a Resolution to the City Commission who
will make the final decision on the applicant’s request.
A preliminary plat application was submitted on December 17, 2013 and after the receipt of
additional information required by Title 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) on
December 30, 2013 was deemed acceptable for initial review on January 6, 2014. The
preliminary plat was reviewed by the DRC on January 15, 22, and 29, 2014. The DRC and Staff
determined the submittal contained detailed, supporting information that is sufficient to allow for
the review of the proposed subdivision on January 24, 2014.
211
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 18 of 36
Public notice for this application was placed in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday,
February 2, 2014. The site was posted with a public notice on February 3, 2014. Public notice
was sent to physically adjacent property owners via certified mail, and to all other property
owners of record within 200 feet of the subject property via first class mail, on January 30, 2014.
One comment has been received on this matter at the time of production of this report.
On February 7, 2014 this major subdivision staff report was drafted and forwarded with a
recommendation of conditional approval by the Planning Director for consideration by the
Planning Board. The Planning Board is scheduled to consider and make recommendation to the
City Commission on February 18, 2014 and the City Commission is scheduled to make a final
decision at their March 3, 2014 public hearing. The final decision for a Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plat must be made within 60 working days of the date it was deemed adequate; or in
this case by April 14, 2014.
4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations
Based on review of the DRC and the Department of Community Development all applicable
regulations appear to be met. Pertinent code provisions and site specific requirements are
included in this report for City Commission consideration.
5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and
installation of any necessary utilities
As noted under Staff Finding No. 2 above and required Section 38.23.060.A, all easements,
existing and proposed, shall be accurately depicted and addressed on the final plat and in the
final plat application. Therefore, all utilities and necessary utility easements will be provided
and depicted accordingly on the final plat.
6) The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and
the notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument transferring the
parcel
All of the proposed lots have frontage to public streets constructed to City standards with lot
frontage meeting minimum standard shown on the preliminary plat. In addition, pursuant to
Section 38.24.090.A, BMC, plats shall contain a statement requiring lot accesses to be built to
the standard contained in this section, the city design standards and specifications policy, and the
city modifications to state public works standard specifications.
Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608
1) The effect on agriculture
The subject property is designated as a residential area according to the City of Bozeman
Community Plan. The area is zoned for residential development has previously undergone
subdivision review and approval and has begun to be developed. Therefore, this subsequent
subdivision will not have adverse effects on agriculture.
212
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 19 of 36
2) The effect on Agricultural water user facilities
Although the subject property is designated as a residential area according to the City of
Bozeman Community Plan, the area is zoned for residential development, has previously
undergone subdivision review and approval, and has begun to be developed, maintaining
functional agricultural water user facilities to convey water rights for functional purpose is
required. Staff solicited comment from the Middle Creek Ditch Company (MCDC) to assess
whether or not subdivision may cause harm to these facilities. In a letter dated January 21, 2014
MCDC submitted comments and provided suggested mitigation to ensure no adverse effects
were generated by this subdivision. As a result the Applicants representative responded by
suggesting Conditions of Approval be included to ensure any impacts are mitigated.
The original Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision provided all necessary easements for
conveyance and ongoing maintenance and rerouted a ditch to flow due north parallel to South
27th Avenue, then easterly parallel to Graff Street. In addition the original subdivision required a
statement that the plat must contain a notation stating that all downstream water user facilities
will not be impacted by this subdivision and that it also be noted accordingly in the by-laws and
protective covenants of the homeowners’ association. To fully comply with State Law and to
mitigate impacts Condition 13 perpetuates this requirement. Therefore, the proposed subdivision
will have minimal impacts on agricultural water user facilities.
3) The effect on Local services
Water/Sewer – Municipal water and sewer mains exist in the adjacent street right-of-ways.
Additional water and sewer mains will be installed in Road A right-of-way to provide service for
each new lot. Each lot will connect to the newly constructed water and sewer mains designed to
the appropriate design standard shall be located in the standard location as approved by the
water/sewer superintendent. The proposed density is less than was previously approved for the
site therefore, little if any additional impacts on local services will be caused by this subdivision.
Streets – The DRC has determined that the adjacent streets have capacity to accommodate this
development. Following new water and service line installations to accommodate the new
lots/development, all street improvements will be constructed to acceptable City standards with
curb, gutter, pavement, boulevard sidewalks and storm water facilities.
Police/Fire – The property is located within the City’s Police and Fire emergency response area.
The subdivider must obtain addresses for the new lots from the City Engineer’s Office prior to
filing the final plat to facilitate emergency response to the site.
Stormwater - The standard requirement for a detailed review of the final grading and drainage
plan, and approval by the City Engineer, will be required as part of the infrastructure plan and
specification review process prior to final plat approval. Specific locations for storm water areas
are show on the face of the plat.
213
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 20 of 36
Parklands - The applicant proposed utilizing previously dedicated parkland credits from the
original Meadow Creek Subdivision to meet Section 38.27, BMC. The Amended Plat of
Meadow Creek Subdivision (APMC) had an original park allocation by Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision of 89 dwelling units or 2.67-acres of park. APMC proposes 42 dwelling units or
1.26- acres, or a reduction of 1.41-acres of park.
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision dedicated two park areas; Lerner Park and Ainsworth Park
(see Figure 16-1). Based on the final plat for Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision (Figures 16-
2.1 & 16-2.2) these parks have 11.809-acres of dedicated parkland credit. Both parks have been
improved per the Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April 19, 2006, as documented by the aerial
images shown on Figures 16-3.1 & 16-3.2. DOWL HKM also inventoried actual built dwelling
units to planned (Figure 16-4) and found that new maximum density of Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision to be 365 units. This count was conservative for the count assumed any vacant lot
would use the maximum planned density, where the built lots have been consistently to a lower
density. The aforementioned figures are within the Parks and Recreation Facilities document
forwarded with this report.
The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board subdivision reviewed the proposed on January 3,
2014. The Board considered that the proposed is within a previously platted subdivision with
developed parks (Lerner and Ainsworth Parks) that meet the dedication requirement. The only
change to the original approved plat is that some multi-family lots are to be built as single-family
units. This will create 42 dwelling units as opposed to the originally planned 89. In addition, the
net result of this is reduction of dwelling units would be a reduction of the impact on the parks
and the new lots would contribute to park maintenance by joining the existing HOA.
The RPAB found that the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek subdivision would not have adverse
park implications with this request and recommend approval.
4) The effect on the Natural environment
No significant physical or topographical features have been identified, (e.g., outcroppings,
geological formations, steep slopes), on the subject property. Provisions will be made to address
the control of noxious weeds and maintenance of the property and will be further addressed by
inclusion in the existing protective covenants and compliance with the recommended conditions
of approval.
5) The effect on Wildlife and wildlife habitat
The further subdivision of the existing lots will have minimal impacts on wildlife and wildlife
habitat. The impacts to the more important habitat areas were addressed and mitigated during
the review of the Meadow Creek Phase 1 subdivision and are preserved as open space and
parklands. Finally, the project is in a developing area identified for development.
6) The effect on Public health and safety
The intent of the regulations in Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision has been reviewed by the DRC which
214
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 21 of 36
has determined that it is in general compliance with the title. Any other conditions deemed
necessary to ensure compliance have been noted throughout this staff report. In addition, all
subdivisions must be reviewed against the criteria listed in 76-3-608.3.b-d, Mont Code Ann. and
as a result, the Department of Community Development has reviewed this application against the
listed criteria and further provides the following summary for submittal materials and
requirements.
Preliminary Plat Supplements
A subdivision pre-application plan review was completed by the DRC on September 25, 2013.
With the pre-application plan review application, waivers were requested by the applicant from
Section 38.41.060 “Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements” for several of the
standard preliminary plat supplements due to the nature of this previously platted/developed
property. The DRC granted a partial waiver to the supplemental information under 38.41.060,
BMC is granted with this pre-application plan review application for: 1) groundwater 2)
geology-soils-slopes, 3) vegetation, 4) wildlife, 5) historical features, 6) agriculture, 7)
agricultural water user facilities, 8) educational facilities, 9) land use, 10) neighborhood center
11) miscellaneous, and 12) affordable housing. All applicable information related to the above
and listed in 38.41.060 for review are still required with the preliminary plat application the
applicant may use the previous information submitted with the Meadow Creek Subdivision
Phase 1.
A waiver to the supplemental information for the following are not granted: 1) surface water, 2)
floodplains, 3) water and sewer, 4) stormwater management, 5) street, roads and alleys, 6)
utilities, 7) parks and recreational facilities, and 8) lighting plan. Staff offers the following
summary comments on the supplemental information required with Article 38.41, BMC.
38.41.060.A.1 Surface Water
The Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision is drained by a series of un-named stream channels and
the subdivision was designed so that the streams were located in undeveloped common areas to
minimize disruption to the riparian corridors. A stream channel is adjacent to the property to the
east with associated wetlands. The stream channel floodplain and wetlands are shown on the
plat. However, there are no wetlands on the subject property. The wetlands are limited to the
adjoining common area. Pursuant to Section 38.23.100, B.M.C, a 50 foot wetland setback is
required.
Although there is no proposed change in the exterior boundaries of the property, the current
proposal intends to create tracks of record for residential development requiring no additional
plat or plan review. The existing lots were designated for multi-household development which
would require additional review, which in turn, allowed the property boundaries to be located
within the required 50 foot wetland setback. The proposed APMC is requesting a variance from
required wetland setbacks for this subdivision. The applicant request and analysis is detailed in
variance review criteria section in this report.
215
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 22 of 36
APMC does not propose any alteration to the streams or common areas.
38.41.060.A.2 Floodplains
The Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Phase 1 shows the 100- year flood boundary per the
Meadow Creek Subdivision Flood Study Report, August, 30, 2005, Allied Engineering. The
aforementioned study determined the 100-year flood boundary, elevations and sized the
conveyance elements of the storm system to pass the 100-year flood event. In the case of APMC
the 100-year flood event is conveyed by an unnamed stream channel within the common area
adjacent to and east of APMC. The 100 year flood event is contained within the unnamed
channel and does not impact the proposed APMC project. The APMC does not propose to
construct any improvements within the unnamed stream channel or common area that would
obstruct the 100-year flood event and alter the flood boundaries. DOWL HKM has reviewed the
Allied Engineering flood study and finds the report reflective of current site conditions. The
complete copy of the Meadow Creek Flood Study is available upon request. The Meadow Creek
Flood Study was submitted to the City in conjunction with the Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision and is the current study for the area and has not been superseded by any FEMA
mapping per the FEMA Map Center. The Specific FEMA Panel of interest (0814D) is labeled
“Panel Not Printed – No Special Flood Hazard Areas”.
38.41.060.A.3 Groundwater
Supplemental groundwater information was granted a waiver to the supplemental information
requirement by the pre-application process and may use the previous information submitted with
the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. Extensive groundwater monitoring was performed for
the Meadow Creek Phase 1 subdivision showing a proclivity of high groundwater in the area.
DOWL HKM stated the groundwater investigation is still valid and applicable for the Phase 1
Subdivision has been developed per the geotechnical report and that recent foundation
excavations within Meadow Creek Phase 1 are consistent with the findings of the investigation.
Mitigation for potential high groundwater includes home construction limitations in the
covenants and connection to central sewer and water connection to the City of Bozeman.
38.41.060.A.4 Geology, Soils and Slopes
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. The subject property has previous undergone
subdivision review. There are no known geologic hazards associated with the site. The
property is relatively flat minimizing geologic hazards.
38.41.060.A.5 Vegetation
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. No significant or critical vegetation exists on the
subject property. Noxious weeds are being controlled by the required Noxious Weed
Management Plan. In addition, there are ongoing performance measures required with the Weed
Management Plan to insure control of noxious weeds on site.
216
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 23 of 36
38.41.060.A.6 Wildlife
Supplement information waived by the DRC. This is a developing urban area.
38.41.060.A.7 Historical Features
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. This is a developing urban area. According to
the Meadow Creek Phase 1 subdivision submittal there was no indication of any prehistoric or
historic cultural resources on the site.
38.41.060.A.8 Agriculture
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. This is a developing area and this property is not
used for agriculture.
38.41.060.A.9 Agricultural Water User Facilities
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. This is a developing area and all necessary ditch
easements are in place. However, to address concerns raised by the Middle Creek Ditch
Company, Staff included Condition 13 to bring the subdivision further into compliance with
adopted regulations.
38.41.060.A.10 Water and Sewer
Water for domestic and fire protection will be provided by connections to the City of Bozeman
water system. Public infrastructure improvements adjacent to the property (roads, parks, water,
and sewer) have been constructed to City of Bozeman standards around the perimeter of the
property. Additional water and sewer lines will be constructed to serve each individual lot. The
City Engineering Department has reviewed the plans. City Engineering conditioned the
subdivision that all water and sewer service lines shall be located in the standard location as
approved by the water/sewer superintendent.
38.41.060.A.11 Stormwater Management
Stormwater within the amended plat of lots 8-15, block 5, & lots 14-18, block 9 of Meadow
Creek Subdivision will be divided into two drainage basins. One basin for the area north of Kurk
Drive and east of South 27th Avenue, and one for the area located south of Kurk Drive and east
of South 27th Avenue.
Design standards for the detention pond accommodate a10-year event and limit developed runoff
to pre-developed rate. The inlets and Conveyance piping are designed to accommodate a 25-
year event. The final location and placement of detention/retention ponds shall be such that they
do not impact the watercourse corridor and/or public parkland and shall be designed and installed
as irregular shaped landscape features, properly landscaped, with depths of not more than 1 ½ to
2 feet in depth and side slopes of not more than 1:4 (horizontal to vertical fall, or 25%).
217
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 24 of 36
Storm water facilities will be identified as “common areas” on the final plat that are owned and
maintained by the homeowner’s association. All storm water facility outlet structures will be
properly landscaped and a minimum distance of not less than ten (10) from any watercourse high
water mark will be required. Placement and design of the facilities will be approved by both the
City Engineer’s Office and Planning Office.
38.41.060.A.12 Streets, Roads and Alleys
Lot access to the Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision (APMC) will be provided
by a standard 35’ wide public street with curb-gutter and sidewalk on both sides. This public
street will be in a 60’ dedicated public right-of-way and will connect into the existing street grid
system and will be constructed to local City street standards. Graf Street and South 27th Avenue will be the primary collector / arterial classified streets accessing APMC. The 60’ wide
dedicated public right-of-way will provide a typical lot frontage of 65’ to 75’. See attached plan
and detail for proposed road alignment and section. No modification to the existing streets,
roads or alleys is proposed.
A Traffic Impact Study was prepared for the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek subdivision and
submitted with the preliminary plat application. The analysis presented in the report indicates
the proposed development site-generated traffic can be adequately accommodated by the existing
roadway network adjacent to the site through the proposed build-out year of the development
(2017). This estimate of level of service (LOS) is based on worst-case site trip generation of the
proposed development. Considering the proposed development site-generated traffic is not
expected to cause the study intersections to fall below the acceptable LOS C by 2017, no other
traffic control improvements to the existing street network are considered necessary for the
development of the Meadow Creek subdivision.
218
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 25 of 36
Multi-modal transportation is being addressed by an existing gravel path that runs along the east
boundary of the project. In addition, to enhance connectivity between this path and South 27th
Avenue mid-block gravel paths will be installed. The location of the access and the construction
of the path allow the subdivider to construct a block length in excess of 400 feet as allowed
pursuant to Section 38.23.040.D, BMC.
38.41.060.A.13 Utilities
All private utilities servicing the subdivision will be installed underground. The DRC and local
review agencies did not identify any potential impacts and/or concerns with providing private
utilities to the subdivision. The final plat shall provide public utility easements along all front,
side and rear lot lines as required by Section 38.23.050, BMC.
However, in the event front and/or rear yard utility easements are used, side rear yard easements
must still be provided on the plat unless written confirmation is submitted to the Planning Office
from all utility companies and Director of Public Works indicating that front and rear yard 10-
foot wide easements are adequate to service said subdivision lots.
38.41.060.A.14 Educational Facilities
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. No additional density is being proposed with
this subdivision.
38.41.060.A.15 Land Use
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. The 42 proposed lots comply with the existing zoning designation of R-3.
38.41.060.A.16 Parks and Recreation Facilities
The Applicant proposed utilizing available parkland credits from the existing dedicated parkland
within Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. Specifically, Ainsworth and Lerner Parks which
include 11.809-acres of park area dedicated with the platting of Meadow Creek Phase 1. APMC
had an original park allocation by Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision of 89 dwelling units or
2.67-acres of park. APMC proposes 42 dwelling units or 1.26-acres, or a reduction of 1.41-acres
of park. Both parks have been improved per the Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April 19,
2006 documented in the Applicant Submittal. It is the subdivider’s intent to join the existing
Meadow Creek Home Owner’s Association and pay into the ongoing maintenance of the park
facilities (Condition 7).
Parks and Recreation Board (RPAB) reviewed the proposed park plat at their January 3, 2014
meeting. The RPAB noted the resulting subdivision will reduce the impact on the parks and the
new lots will contribute to park maintenance by joining the existing HOA. In conclusion, the
RPAB sees no adverse park implications with this request and recommends approval.
219
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 26 of 36
38.41.060.A.17 Neighborhood Center Plan
Supplemental information was waived by the DRC during the pre-application process and may
use the previous information submitted with the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. However, the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek proposes to continue the original neighborhood center plan. The original plan is to develop Miller Park adjacent to Enterprise Boulevard and Alder Creek
Dive with possible amenities including community building, pavilion, playground, athletic fields,
sports courts, and a trail system. Miller Park has not been developed.
38.41.060.A.18 Lighting Plan
Subdivision or street lighting is required pursuant to Section 38.23.150.B, BMC. The street
lighting plan will mimic the previously reviewed Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision Light Plan
to provide lighting consistency with the adjoining subdivision. A lighting plan will need to be
submitted for review and approval prior to the contracting, creation of an S.I.L.D. and
installation of lights (Advisory Condition c). The plan shall include a pole light detail with
spacing based on high pedestrian conflict, a local street pole light at one per local street
intersection, and a bollard light detail for placement at pathway/street intersections. All street
lights installed shall use LED light heads lights, including bollard light, and shall conform to the
City’s requirement for cut-off shields.
38.41.060.A.19 Miscellaneous
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. The subdivision will not impact access to any
public lands and there are no identified hazards in proximity to the subject property.
220
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 27 of 36
38.41.060.A.20 Affordable Housing
Supplemental information waived by the DRC. The Workforce Housing Ordinance (Ordinance
1710) had been suspended by the City Commission.
Zoning Variance Review Criteria, Section 38.35.060, BMC
Review criteria. Per MCA 76-3-506, a variance to this chapter must be based on specific
variance criteria, and may not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of this chapter.
The criteria for granting zoning variances under Section 38.35.060 apply. In acting on an
application for a variance, the review authority shall designate such lawful conditions as will
secure substantial protection for the public health, safety and general welfare, and shall issue
written decisions setting forth factual evidence that the variance meets the standards of MCA 76-
2-323 in that the variance:
1. Will not be contrary to and will serve the public interest;
There is no change to exterior boundary of the proposed subdivision from the original Meadow
Creek Subdivision boundary. Subsequently, a wetland mitigation area was constructed after the
initial development of Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision which was constructed too close to
the property line and with an irregular boundary. The proximity of the created wetland created
the situation necessitating the request from wetland setback requirements. The variance request
only applies to Lots 7 – 10 in Block 1. The minimum requested setback is 35.3 feet with an
average along Lots 7 – 10 of approximately 45 feet.
The proposed variance meets the intent of the existing ordinance and is not contrary to public
interest. The variance maintains the current wetland buffer between the mitigated wetlands and
the gravel trail and serves the public interest by the continued utilization of the existing gravel
trail. The existing gravel trail provides a defined topographic boundary between the single-
family lots and the wetland buffer. Where practical the 50’ setback has been provided, with an
average setback width of 45’. As shown on the attached map a gravel trail has been constructed
parallel to the east property line of the project within the adjoining open space. This trail was
constructed several years ago by the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. The trail is well
established and is a permitted use within Zone 2 of the setback per Section 38.23.100(2.)(e.) of
the UDO. The intent of allowing the trail within the setback is that it provides a defined
boundary between the upland and wetland areas. The trailed is proposed to be left “as is” and
will serve as the general topographic boundary between the home and the wetland areas. Finally,
Section 38.08.050, BMC, requires an additional 20 foot rear yard setback between the property
line and any structure. Therefore, granting the variance will not be contrary to and will serve the
public interest.
221
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 28 of 36
2. Is necessary, owing to conditions unique to the property, to avoid an unnecessary
hardship which would unavoidably result from the enforcement of the literal meaning
of this chapter; and
The need for the requested variance is unique to the property due to the shape of the property,
proximity to a water course and a wetland mitigation area installed by a third party prior to
ownership by the applicant. The mitigation area was permitted and installed after the platting of
the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. The construction of the mitigation area was installed
too close to the property line so that a 50’ buffer encroached onto the property boundary. The
shape of the property influences the width of the existing property resulting if that if a full width
wetland setback (50’) is applied it will adversely affect lot depth verses the requested buffer
width of 35’ (minimum) which will allow a more typical lot depth of approximately 100’. The
area immediately adjacent is bounded by open space with a constructed trail creating a buffer
between the residential area and the wetlands.
Finally, the hardship does not include difficulties arising from actions, or otherwise be self-
imposed, by the applicant or previous predecessors in interest, or potential for greater financial
returns.
3. Will observe the spirit of this chapter, including the adopted growth policy, and do
substantial justice;
The proposed variance meets the spirit of the existing ordinance. The requested variance
provides a wetland buffer between the mitigated wetlands and the gravel trail to protect the
wetlands. It also provides continued use of the existing gravel trail. This trail provides for
recreation and a topographic boundary between the single household lots and the wetland buffer.
4. In addition to the criteria specified above, in the case of a variance relating to the flood
hazard provisions of article 31 of this chapter:
Not applicable, requested variance is not related to flood hazard.
222
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 29 of 36
APPENDIX A –ADVISORY CODE CITATIONS
The following code provisions are identified for informational purposes as the project moves
forward. These will need to be addressed as part of the final site plan application or other process
step.
a. Pursuant to Section 38.03.040.A of the BMC, conditional approval of the preliminary plat
shall be in force for not more than one calendar year for minor subdivisions, two years for
single-phased major subdivisions and three years for multi-phased major subdivisions. As a single phase major subdivision, conditional approval of the preliminary plat for the Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision shall in be
force for two (2) years. Prior to that expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of
request for the extension of the period to the Community Development Director with each
request considered on its individual merits and consideration of the criteria provided in 38.03.040.A.
b. Per Section 38.02.050, BMC "Disposition of Water Rights” - Water rights, or cash-in-lieu
thereof, as calculated by the Director of Public Service, is due with the filing of each
subdivision final plat.
c. Per Section 38.23.150, BMC “Lighting” – the SLID for all local subdivision streets shall be updated to include all new lighting. A lighting plan shall be submitted for review and approval prior to the contracting, creation of an SLID and installation of the lights. The plan
shall include a pole light detail with spacing based on high pedestrian conflict, a local street
pole light at one per local street intersection, and a bollard light detail for placement at
pathway/street intersections. All lights including the bollard light shall conform to the City’s requirement for cut-off shields.
d. Pursuant to Section 38.21.060.C.1, BMC “Corner Lots” – The property owner’s association
documents shall provide language stating that all corner lots shall have the same orientation
as dwellings on lots on the interior of the block. The final plat shall indicate the orientation
of all corner lots.
e. Pursuant to Section 38.23.030.D, BMC, corner lots shall have sufficient width to permit appropriate building setbacks from both streets and provide acceptable visibility for traffic
safety. Further, homes on corner lots shall have the same orientation as homes on lots on the
interior of the block, unless otherwise approved through an overall development plan.
Covenants shall contain information regarding the orientation for all corner lots. The preliminary plat shall indicate the orientation of all corner lots.
f. Pursuant to Section 38.23.050, BMC “Utilities” - Utilities shall be placed underground,
wherever technically and economically feasible. If overhead utility lines are used, they shall
be placed along the rear property line.
g. Pursuant to Section 38.23.120, BMC - If mail will not be delivered to each individual lot within the development, the developer shall provide an off-street area for mail delivery within the development in cooperation with the United States Postal Service. All cluster mail
boxes must be ADA accessible and placed accordingly. It shall not be the responsibility of
the City to maintain or plan any mail delivery area constructed within a City right-of-way.
223
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 30 of 36
h. Pursuant to Section 38.25.020.A, BMC “Parking Dimensions” – The homeowners’
association documents shall include language stating the minimum provisions for one-stall and two-stall vehicle garages as outlined by Section 38.25.020.A, BMC.
i. Pursuant to Section 38.26.050.E, BMC “Street Frontage’ – The homeowner’s association
documents shall contain language stating that all street rights-of-way contiguous to or within
the proposed development site not used for street pavement, curbs, gutters, sidewalks or
driveways (i.e., street boulevards) shall be landscaped, as defined in the Bozeman Municipal Code, and shall include one (1) large canopy tree for each 50 feet of total street frontage rounded to the nearest whole number. For street trees, a City of Bozeman planting permit for
street trees and obtaining utility locations before any excavation begins in the City of
Bozeman right-of-way. The covenants shall include a planting note stating that the planting
hole shall be at least twice the diameter of the root ball, that the root flare of the newly planted tree is visible and above ground, and there shall be a mulch ring 3’- 4’ in diameter around each newly planted boulevard tree.
j. Pursuant to Section 38.39.030.B.2, BMC “Sidewalks” – The final plat and homeowner’s
association documents shall include language stating that “upon the third anniversary of the
plat recordation of any phase of the subdivision, any lot owner who has not constructed said sidewalk shall, without further notice, construct within 30 days, said sidewalk for their lot(s), regardless of whether other improvements have been made upon the lot.
k. Pursuant to Section 38.26.070, BMC “Landscaping of Public Lands” - Requires the
subdivider to install irrigation, turf grass and street trees on the portions of open space and
parkland adjacent to public streets. Trees may not be located within 10 feet of sewer and water services. Sewer and water services shall be shown on the landscaping plan of the park and open space plan, and be approved by the Water/Sewer Superintendent. A landscape plan
prepared by a certified nurseryperson shall be submitted, identifying the location and tree
species to be installed by the developer, prior to installation of the trees or prior to final plat
approval, whichever comes first.
l. Per Section 38.23.080.G, BMC “Finish Grade” - All finish grades in landscaped areas shall comply with the provisions set forth in Section 38.26.050.L.
m. Per Section 38.23.080.H “Landscape Amenities” - Stormwater retention/detention facilities
in landscaped areas shall be designed as landscape amenities. They shall be an organic
feature with a natural, curvilinear shape. The facilities shall have 75 percent of surface area covered with live vegetation appropriate for the depth and design of the retention/detention facility, and be lined with native grasses, indigenous plants, wet root tolerant plant types and
groupings of boulders to create a functional yet, natural site feature. A visual inspection notes
that some of the stormwater facilities do not copy with this section including the 25%
maximum slope.
n. Pursuant to Section 38.27.090, BMC “Waiver of Park Maintenance District – Prior to final plat approval, executed waivers of right to protest the creation of special improvement
districts (SIDs) for a park maintenance district will be required to be filed and of record with
the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder, unless already previously filed.
o. Pursuant to Section 38.38.030, BMC “Covenants” - Covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the creation of a property owners’ association shall be submitted with the
224
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 31 of 36
final plat application for review and approval by the Planning Office and shall contain, but
not be limited to the following items: 1) the orientation and setbacks for corner lots, 2) all additional setbacks required when lots are adjacent to pathway corridors and minor arterial roads, 3) provisions for fences, 4) provisions for snow removal, maintenance and upkeep of
all common areas, public and private parks, trails, storm water runoff facilities, 5) guidelines
that outline architectural and landscape requirements for each individual lot and/or phase of
the subdivision, including placement of boulevard trees at a regular spacing for each residential lot, 6) provisions that outline the renewal of an annual contract with a certified landscape nursery person for the upkeep and maintenance of all parklands, common open
space, trails, etc., 7) landscape details for detention ponds, outlet structures, boulevard trees,
parkland, irrigation, etc., 8) mitigation of groundwater with established floor elevations and
“no basement restriction”, 9) architectural guidelines for residential character, porches, fenestration treatment, placement of garages, boulevard trees, 10) noxious weed control, 11) parking within residential structures, and 12) assessment of existing and future Special
Improvement Districts.
These documents shall be submitted to the city attorney and shall not be accepted by the City
until approved as to legal form and effect. A draft of these documents must be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department at least 30 working days prior to submitting a final plat application. These documents shall be executed and submitted
with the initial final plat to be filed with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder at the time
of final plat recordation.
p. Pursuant to Section 38.39.030, BMC “Completion of Improvements” - If it is the developer’s intent to file the plat prior to the completion of all required improvements, an Improvements Agreement shall be entered into with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the completion of all
improvements in accordance with the preliminary plat submittal information and conditions
of approval. If the final plat is filed prior to the installation of all improvements, the
developer shall supply the City of Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to 150 percent of the cost of the remaining improvements.
q. Final plats shall contain the applicable language for all certificates listed in Sections
38.06.020 through 38.06.110. Pursuant to Section 38.41.070 a final subdivision plat may not
be approved by the city unless all certificates, with the exception of the director of public
works and the county clerk and recorder, have been complied with, signed and notarized and all subdivision regulation and conditions of preliminary plat approval have been met.
225
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 32 of 36
APPENDIX B – PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The subject property is zoned “R-3” (Residential Medium Density District). The intent of the R-
3 residential medium density district is to provide for the development of one- to five-household
residential structures near service facilities within the city. It should provide for a variety of
housing types to serve the varied needs of households of different size, age and character, while
reducing the adverse effect of nonresidential uses.
Pursuant to Section 38.08.080, BMC, minimum net density in the R-3 District is five dwellings
per net acre. A minimum is required to support efficiency in use of land and provision of
municipal services, and to advance the purposes and goals of this chapter and the adopted growth
policy. The parent 13 lots were intended to accommodate 89 dwelling units. The proposed
subdivision will create 42 residential single-household lots, a 53 percent reduction. However, 42
dwellings units equates to a density of 5.72 dwellings per net acre.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
The property is designated as “Residential” in the Bozeman Community Plan. The Plan
indicates that “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. High density residential
areas should be established in close proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the provision of
services and employment opportunities to persons without requiring the use of an automobile.
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.”
The dwelling unit density expected within this classification varies between 6 and 32 dwellings per
net acre.
226
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 33 of 36
APPENDIX C – DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Project Description
The property owner DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue, Suite 4, Bozeman, MT
59718, represented by DOWL HKM, 2090 Stadium Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 submitted
application to replat 13 existing lots with the Meadow Creek Subdivision to create 42 single-
household residential lots with open space and right-of-ways. Parkland will be provided by
existing park areas dedicated with the original Meadow Creek subdivision. The newly created
lots will be required to be added to the existing property owners association (POA) and provide
their fair share of park and other related maintenance activities performed by the POA.
The original plat intended the existing 13 lots as multi-household development. These lots
would have required further review prior to development. Although there is no change in the
exterior boundaries of the subdivision the new configuration triggers Section 38.23.100, B.M.C.,
necessitating the request from wetland setback requirements. The variance request only applies
to Lots 7 – 10 in Block 1 for a variance from the 50 foot wetland setback requirement. As stated
in the Applicant Submittal the minimum requested setback is 35.3 feet with an average along
Lots 7 – 10 of approximately 45 feet.
Project Background
Meadow Creek Subdivision received preliminary plat approval on Monday, November 7, 2005
to subdivide approximately 202.40± acres situated west of South 19th Avenue and south of
Stucky Road. Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision was recorded with Clerk and Recorder on
December 19, 2006. On November 24, 2008 the City Commission granted Meadow Creek
Partners, L.L.C., represented by Neal Ainsworth a one-year extension to the preliminary plat
approval. The reaming area within the original Meadow Creek Subdivisions have changed
ownership and received preliminary plat extensions under their new names such as Southbridge
Subdivision.
227
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 34 of 36
Figure 1: Meadow Creek Subdivision
228
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 35 of 36
APPENDIX D – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
A subdivision pre-application was submitted on August 23, 2013. The pre-application was
reviewed by the DRC on September 25, 2013 and summary review comments were forwarded to
the applicant in preparation of the preliminary plat application and granted numerous
supplemental information waivers under 38.41.060, BMC.
A complete preliminary plat application was submitted on December 17, 2013 and deemed
acceptable for initial review after additional information was provided January 6, 2014. The
preliminary plat was reviewed by the DRC on January 15, 22, and 29, 2014. On January 24,
2014 the DRC, WRB, and Staff determined the submittal contained detailed, supporting
information that is sufficient to allow for the review of the proposed subdivision. On January 11,
2014 the Wetlands Review Board met and considered the Applicant’s request for a variance from
wetlands setback requirements. Both the W.R.B. and the D.R.C. provided favorable
recommendation was forwarded for consideration by the City Commission.
Public notice for this application was placed in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday,
February 2, 2014. The site was posted with a public notice on January 31, 2014. Public notice
was sent to adjacent property owners via certified mail, and to all other property owners of
record within 200 feet of the subject property via first class mail, on January 31, 2014. One
comment email was received by the Community Development Department on February 6, 2014.
The comment letter is summarized in the attached Planning Board resolution.
On February 13, 2014 this subdivision staff report was drafted and forwarded with a
recommendation of conditional approval by the Planning Director for consideration by the
Bozeman Planning Board and City Commission. The Planning Board is scheduled to consider
the application on February 18, 2014. The City Commission is scheduled to make a final
decision at their March 3, 2014 public hearing.
The final decision for a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat must be made within 60 working
days of the date it was deemed complete or in this case by April 21, 2014.
229
P-13046, Staff Report for the AMENDED PLAT OF MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1
SUBDIVISION Page 36 of 36
APPENDIX E – OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Owner: DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue, Suite 4, Bozeman, MT 59718
Applicant: DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue, Suite 4, Bozeman, MT 59718
Representative: DOWL HKM, 2090 Stadium Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715
Report By: Tom Rogers, AICP, Associate Planner
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified.
ATTACHEMENTS
1. Staff Report
2. Planning Board Resolution #P-13046 (Draft)
3. Planning Board Meeting Minutes, February 18, 2014
4. Applicant’s submittal materials
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street.
230
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 1 of 7
RESOLUTION #P-13046
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD REGARDING A
MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION TO SUBDIVIDE (REPLAT) 13 EXISTING LOTS CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 10.45 ACRES, INTO 42 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE HOUSEHOLD LOTS ON PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS THE AMENDED PLAT OF LOTS 8-15, BLOCK 5 & LOTS 14-18, BLOCK 9,
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION PHASE 1 LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST ONE-
QUARTER (SE ¼) OF SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP TWO SOUTH (T2S), RANGE FIVE EAST (R5E), P.M.M. GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted a growth policy pursuant to Section 76-1-
601, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board has been created by Resolution of the
Bozeman City Commission as provided for in Title 76-1-101, M.C.A.; and
WHEREAS, the property owner DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue,
Suite 4, Bozeman, MT 59718, represented by DOWL HKM, 2090 Stadium Drive, Bozeman, MT
59715 submitted a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application to subdivide (replat) 13
existing lots containing approximately 10.45-acres into 42 residential single-household lots on
property described as the Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow
Creek Subdivision Phase 1 located in the Southeast One-Quarter (SE ¼) of Section 23, Township
Two South (T2S), Range Five East (R5E), P.M.M. Gallatin County, Montana; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application has been
properly submitted, reviewed, and advertised in accordance with the procedures of Section 38.03
of the Bozeman Unified Development Code; and
231
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 2 of 7
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday,
February 18, 2014, to review the application and any written public testimony on the request for
said Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application; and
WHEREAS, public testimony was made on the matter of the preliminary plat application.
The testimony addressed stormwater management, development of the subdivision, and
comments on Section 27 of the adopted Meadow Creek Covenants. Section 27 states, “No Lot
may be re-subdivided without the consent of the City and the Meadow Creek Homeowners
Association…” However, all public comments were in support of the application; and
WHEREAS, members of the City of Bozeman Planning Board discussed the proposed
preliminary plat application in regards to the character of the area and the intent of the
subdivision and zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board moved to recommend approval of the
requested wetland setback variance by a vote of (7:1). Mayor Kraus voted in opposition of the
variance request finding there was insufficient evidence of physical hardship; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board moved to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat application with the recommended conditions of approval provided in the staff
report; and
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board reviewed the application against the
requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and found that, with conditions, the
Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application would comply with those requirements; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Bozeman
Planning Board, having heard and considered public comment, adopted the findings presented in
the staff report for P-13046 and voted (8:0) to recommend approval of the preliminary plat
application for the Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision authorizing to
subdivide (replat) Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase
1, containing approximately 10.45-acres, into 42 six residential single-household lots subject to
the following conditions:
1. The final plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC)
and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all
required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings
232
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 3 of 7
for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required certificates.
The final plat application shall include three (3) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or
heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies; one (1) PDF copy;
and five (5) paper prints.
2. 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 BMC or State law.
3. The applicant shall submit with the application for final plat review and approval, a written
narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval and noted code provisions have been satisfactorily addressed, and shall include a digital copy (pdf) of the
entire final plat submittal. This narrative shall be in sufficient detail to direct the reviewer
to the appropriate plat, plan, sheet, note, covenant, etc. in the submittal.
4. The subdivider shall provide the necessary declaration and recitals creating the property
owner’s association bylaws and/or declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions as being part of the existing Meadow Creek Subdivision property owners association. Any
cost sharing agreements for maintenance shall be included with the final plat.
5. The final plat shall contain the following notation on its face or in a document to be
recorded with the final plat:
“Ownership of all common open space areas and trails, and responsibility of maintenance thereof and for city assessments levied on the common open space lands shall be that of the
property owner’s association. Maintenance responsibility shall include, in addition to the
common open space and trails, all vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees and irrigation
systems in the public right-of-way boulevard strips along all external perimeter
development streets and adjacent to public parks or other common open space areas. All areas within the subdivision that are designated herein as common open space including
trails are for the use and enjoyment by residents of the development and the general public.
The property owner’s association shall be responsible for levying annual assessments to
provide for the maintenance, repair, and upkeep of all common open space areas and trails.
At the same time of recording the final plat for each phase of the subdivision the subdivider shall transfer ownership of all common open space areas within each phase to the property
owner’s association created by the subdivider to maintain all common open space areas
within Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision”.
6. Documentation of compliance with the parkland dedication requirements of Section
38.27.020, BMC shall be provided with the final plat. A table showing the parkland requirements for the subdivision and the method of meeting the parkland dedication shall
be included on the final plat, or other recordable document acceptable to the City of
Bozeman. This table shall include but not be limited to listing all dedicated parkland
requirements, parkland or parkland credits and areas not credited towards parkland (i.e.,
detention/retention areas, watercourse setbacks, wetlands, common open space, parking facilities) and the total area of each. The applicant shall provide a minimum of 1.26 acres
of dedicated parkland or equivalent thereof with the major subdivision. This amount is
calculated based on 42 single household residential lots at 0.03 acres per dwelling of
dedicated parkland. The final plat, property owner’s association documents (POA), and
park master plan may not include any reference to “dedicated” open space and Public
233
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 4 of 7
Park; rather if the areas designated as such on the preliminary plat are to be common open
space owned by the POA or a park owned by the POA, or a combination thereof the plat,
POA documents and park master plan must specifically designate them as common open
space owned by the POA, etc. unless the applicant intends to dedicate public parkland within the subdivision.
7. The applicant recognizes it must meet the parkland requirements of Sect. 38.27.020, BMC.
The applicant also recognizes it seeks to use available parkland credits associated with the
dedicated parkland within Meadow Creek Phase 1 including the dedicated city park known
as the “Lerner and Ainsworth Parks” and should therefore participate in the maintenance of such parkland. Therefore, the applicant shall, prior to final plat approval, work with the
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Property Owner’s Association (MCPOA) to arrive at an agreed
upon method to ensure the applicant and any future property owner’s association created
for this subdivision (including all its phases) succeeding in interest to the applicant
contribute sufficient consideration to the MCPOA on an equitable basis for the maintenance and upkeep of existing publicly dedicated parks and publicly accessible open
space lands and trails located within the subdivision. Prior to final plat approval, the
applicant shall provide evidence that an agreed upon method has been established. The
agreement may contain a provision that should the City create a park maintenance district
for maintenance of areas subject to the agreement the agreement may terminate.
The property owner’s association documents created for this subdivision shall include
provisions describing the agreed upon method of contribution to the MCPOA and binding
property owners to contribute to the maintenance and upkeep of dedicated parks and
publicly accessible open space lands as required by the agreement between the applicant
and the MCPOA. The provisions in the property owner’s association documents fulfilling this condition shall be considered required by the City Commission pursuant to
38.38.030.A.5, BMC.
8. A pedestrian walk, constructed to City standards, shall be constructed located in a 30-foot
wide public access easement will be constructed in the common open space areas for Block
1 – 4. The final location, placement and installation schedule shall be approved by the Director of the City of Bozeman Department of Parks and Recreation with of the advice of
the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB). Prior to proceeding with construction
of the public trail the applicant shall have a pre-construction meeting with the Department
of Recreation and Parks.
9. Section 38.23.130 “Fences, Walls and Hedges” - Fences located in the front, side or rear yard setback of properties adjacent to any park or common open space shall not exceed a
maximum height of 4 feet, and shall be of an open construction designed in a manner to be
consistent along all park land and open space areas. This requirement with appropriate
exhibits of fence types shall be addressed and illustrated in the property owner’s
association documents.
10. Section 38.27.070 “Landscaping of Public Lands” – Installation by the developer of
vegetative ground cover, boulevard trees, and irrigation system in the public right-of-way
boulevard strips along all external perimeter development streets and adjacent to public
parks or other open space areas is required with the final plat application.
234
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 5 of 7
11. A 1-foot No Access Strip shall be shown on the plat along the entire frontage of South 27th
Avenue with the exception of Lot 11, Block 4 to allow the shared access easement.
12. Final Plat shall show the 30 foot public utility and access easement on the final plat as
depicted on Meadow Creek Phase plat J-453 as shared access for Lot 13, Block 9. The POA covenants shall include a statement that Lot 11, Block 4 of the Amended plat of
Meadow Creek Subdivision is subject to this easement.
13. A note on the Final Plat shall include non-liability statements referenced under Section 85-
7-2212, Mont. Codes Ann. The property owner’s association documents created for this
subdivision shall also reference these provisions.
14. The final plat application for the subdivision shall include typical cross sections for each
storm water facility in relation to adjacent subdivision improvements and physical features
(i.e., watercourse, Road A), plans verifying placement of the facility only in Zone II of the
watercourse setback, typical landscape and grading details for each storm water facility,
and landscape plans for each facility outlet. The cross sections shall be approved by the city prior to final plat approval.
15. The final plat shall provide all necessary utility easements and shall be described,
dimensioned and shown on the final plat in their true and correct location. Any rear or side
yard utility easements not provided will require written confirmation from ALL utility
companies providing service indicating that rear or side yard easements are not needed.
16. Section 38.41.080.2.g.9 requires a Stormwater Master Plan for the subdivision for a system
designed to remove solids, silt, oils, grease, and other pollutants from the runoff from the
private and public streets and all lots must be provided to and approved by the City
Engineer.
The master plan must depict the maximum sized retention/detention basin location, and locate and provide easements for adequate drainage ways within the subdivision to
transport runoff to the stormwater receiving channel. The plan shall include sufficient site
grading and elevation information (particularly for the basin sites, drainage ways, and lot
finished grades), typical stormwater retention/detention basin and discharge structure
details, basin sizing calculations, and a stormwater maintenance plan.
Any stormwater ponds located within park or open space shall be designed and constructed
so as to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the park or open space. Storm
water ponds shall not be located on private lots.
Detailed review of the final grading and drainage plan and approval by the City Engineer
will be required as part of the infrastructure plan and specification review process
17. A Storm Water Management Permit (SMP) must be submitted and approved by the City
Engineer prior to Preliminary Plat Approval. The SMP requires submittals of an
application form and a Storm Water Management Plan in compliance with the City of
Bozeman’s Storm Water Management Ordinance #1763. The SMP is independent of any
other storm water permitting required from the State of Montana, and does not fulfill the requirement to obtain a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) if they are
required for this development.
235
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 6 of 7
18. Section 38.23.070 specifies that the Developer's engineer will be required to prepare a
comprehensive design report evaluating existing capacity of water and sewer utilities which
must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. The report must include hydraulic
evaluations of each utility for both existing and post-development demands. The report findings must demonstrate adequate capacity to serve the full development. The report
must also identify the proposed phasing of water and sewer construction. If adequate water
and/or sewer capacity is not available for full development, the report must identify
necessary water system and sewer system improvements required for full development.
The Developer will be responsible to complete the necessary system improvements to serve the full development.
All water mains over 500 feet in length must be looped.
19. Section 38.41.080.g.7 requires the location of and distinction between existing and
proposed sewer and water mains and all easements shall be clearly and accurately depicted
on the plans and specs, as well as all nearby fire hydrants and proposed fire hydrants.
20. Section 38.23.060.c specifies any easements needed for the water and sewer main
extensions shall be a minimum of 30 feet in width. While the final location of the water and
sewer mains will be determined once the final street widths are approved, in no case shall
the utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of the easement. All necessary easements shall
be provided prior to final plat approval and shall be shown on the plat. Wherever water and/or sewer mains are not located under or accessed from improved streets, a 12 foot wide
all weather access drive shall be constructed above the utilities to provide necessary access.
21. Section 32.23.070 specifies plans and Specifications for water and sewer main extensions,
prepared and signed by a Professional Engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana
shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans shall also be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant shall
also provide Professional Engineering services for Construction Inspection, Post-
Construction Certification, and preparation of mylar Record Drawings. Construction shall
not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications
have been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted.
No building permits shall be issued prior to City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements unless concurrent construction is granted.
22. City standard curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be provided along all streets in the
subdivision. Per Chapter 38.24.080 of the UDC sidewalks will be installed prior to occupancy of any individual lots.
23. A one foot no access strip shall be recorded on the final plat restricting access for any lots
fronting onto South 27th Avenue.
24. Street names must be approved by the City Engineer and Gallatin County road office prior
to final plat approval.
25. All streets contained within the subdivision shall be within dedicated public right of way and built to city standards.
236
The Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 Page 7 of 7
26. The proposed drive access at the southern portion of the development shown onto South
27th Avenue does not meet the minimum separation standards outlined in BMC section
38.24.090.D.2 (Table 44-3). If the applicant wishes to utilize these accesses for the
proposed development, they must request a relaxation from the City Engineer. The criteria for this request is outlined in BMC section 38.24.090.H.3. The preference of City
Engineering would be to align this access with the existing alignment of Meah Lane.
27. The location of mailboxes shall be coordinated with the City Engineering Department prior
to their installation.
28. Section 38.41.020 outlines additional permits that may be required beyond what is administered by the City of Bozeman. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and
Parks, SCS, Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Army Corps of Engineer’s
shall be contacted regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404,
Turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be obtained prior to plan and specification approval.
29. 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 38.39.020.A.1 of the
Unified Development Ordinance. This shall be submitted as part of the final site plan for
site developments, or with infrastructure plans for subdivisions. It shall be the
responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the construction traffic follows the approved
routes.
30. All construction activities shall comply with section 38.39.020.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.
31. All street lights installed with this subdivision shall use LED light heads.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 2014 Resolution #P-13046
_____________________________ ____________________________
Tom Rogers, Associate Planner Trevor McSpadden, Chairperson Department of Community Development City of Bozeman Planning Board
237
Page 1 of 5
City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of February 18, 2014.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES TUESDAY, February 18, 2014
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President McSpadden called the regular meeting of the Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana and took attendance.
Members Present: Guests Present:
Trever McSpadden, President Mike Popiel
George Thompson Andy Rowe
Julien Morice Dan Barnes
Paul Neubauer Mary Bentley
Laura Dornberger
Jerry Pape Brett Potter
Lindsay Vincent
Cory Robinson Ryan McIntosh
Mayor Krauss
Applicant Representative:
Clint Litle
Members Absent:
Erik Garberg
Staff Present:
Tom Rogers, Associate Planner
ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.)
Trever McSpadden, opened for public comment.
No public comment. Closed Public comment period.
ITEM 3. ELECTION OF OFFICERS If it is ok I would like to move this to Item number 6 right before new business.
ITEM 4. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2013
A motion to accept the minutes of November 5, 2013 was moved, seconded and approved unanimously.
ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW
1. Meadow Creek MaSub Prel. Plat Application P13046 A Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application requested by the property owner DA Land Company, LLC, 1871 South 22nd Avenue, Suite 4, Bozeman, MT 59718 and represented by
DOWL HKM, 2090 Stadium Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715, to allow the further subdivision of 13
existing lots (10.45 acres) to create 42 single-household residential lots with a variance from
Section 38.23.100, B.M.C., wetland setback standards. The property is legally described as the Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1 located in the Southeast One-Quarter (SE ¼) of Section 23, Township Two South (T2S), Range
Five East (R5E), P.M.M. Gallatin County. The project is generally located at the intersection of
Goldeneye Drive and South 27th Avenue. (Rogers)
238
Page 2 of 5
City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of February 18, 2014.
Associate Planner Rogers presents background for Meadow Creek MaSub Prel Plat Application:
• Showed various views of lot area of said application
• Reviewed the variance request regarding the wetland setback requirements.
• Wetland Review Board has reviewed this request and has forwarded a favorable recommendation for this application.
• The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the application on January 29, 2014
and recommended conditional approval of the preliminary plat application subject to the conditions listed on pages 9-14 of the staff report and recommends approval.
Staff stated no public comment has been provided on this application to date; They have received a
couple of phone calls from the property owners association for the Meadow Creek Subdivision and they
brought it to our attention that a requirement within their covenants stated that there is no further subdivision of any existing lot within Phase 1 subdivision without prior approval from the city and the Home Owners Association (HOA). We are before the city tonight and will address that part. The
Applicant has contacted the HOA and begun a dialogue. There is no written approval from HOA yet
and we have a few persons in audience that may comment on this. This is a private covenant and not a
city requirement. Mr. Rogers: Staff will make a recommendation for approval with the conditions there. At this time if
you have any questions of staff I would be happy to answer them as well as the applicant is present to
answer additional questions.
President McSpadden addresses board members with concerns/questions In the spirit of full disclosure I worked with the bank that actually ended up with this property to come
up with a feasibility/concept plan for some of the stuff, so I have done some work on this parcel but I
have no relationship with the applicant and I just want to put that out there for
You and if you are uncomfortable with that let me know. Mr. Pape asked question regarding the location of front door at alley due to setback requirements.
Mr. Rogers: replied that the alley will be of s city Standard Street with curb, gutter, boulevard
sidewalks, as well as other utility and access requirements. President McSpadden: just for clarification there was an alley there, the alley will serve as the access
Ms. Dornberger: asked for clarification if there were other lots designed for multi-family
Mr. Rogers: stated that there are lots designated for multi-household
Mr. Morice: asked for clarification on the requirement of HOA approval - if members wanted to amend
the motion is that necessary?
Mr. Rogers: Staff feels that how it is listed is solid enough and because it is a civil matter and respect and understand the intent. You can move as your board if you feel that is important to make that
suggestion and add as amendment and forward it to commission for consideration.
President McSpadden: Clarifies process of application recommendation. Mr. Potter: asked for clarification on fence requirement as part of variance
Mr. Rogers: clarified variance
239
Page 3 of 5
City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of February 18, 2014.
President McSpadden: Invited applicant for presentation.
Applicant: Clint Litle, engineer with Dowl HKM, representing the owner/applicant DA Land Partners.
• Commends thoroughness of Planning and Engineering departments on the Staff Report.
• Have read SR and are not requesting any changes or proposed conditions
• Reviewed project.
Applicant asked if there were any questions of members. President McSpadden: Any questions for the applicant?
Mr. Neubauer: had question about the lots size and why boundary wasn’t just brought in and then
variance would not be needed. Mr. Litle: the preference is to have a 100 foot lot depth.
President McSpadden opens comment to public Bill Erikson, HOA President of Meadow Creek, had questions regarding direction of garages and
location of storm water holding ponds
Cory Robinson 3575 Parkway Ave: I just have a comment that we would like to see the neighborhood completed.
Mary Bentley 3589 Parkway Ave: I am here to support the re-plat of single-household verses multi-
family homes.
President McSpadden: Close public comment and ask if applicant would like to make a rebuttal.
Mr. Litle: Thanks public for coming out and made comment to Mr. Erikson’s questions. The garages
will face the “Road A” no frontage onto 27th. We are proposing additional ponds that follow City
guidelines and MDEQ standards. Made a comment regarding full cooperation with the HOA to create the best project possible.
Mr. Potter: commented on retention ponds and wetlands
Mr. Litle: clarified storm water ponds are not encroaching wetlands President McSpadden: asked to clarify maintenance burden of the Storm water facilities and how it
weaves itself into existing system on a maintenance perspective.
Mr. Litle: reviewed Storm Water Facilities system plan and the maintenance by HOA Mr. Pape: addressed difference of the maps.
President McSpadden: bring to motion/ discussion/vote
We will need to do the variance first and it would need a motion and second and then discuss variance then we could move onto the subdivision.
240
Page 4 of 5
City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of February 18, 2014.
Mr. Morice: Having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment, and the staff analysis, I hereby adopt the findings presented in staff report for Application P13046 and recommend
the variance from 38.23.100 the wetlands setback standards to the commission for approval. Mr.
Thompson seconded motion.
President McSpadden: any discussion on the variance?
Mr. Morice: I have no problems with variance after reviewing materials and hearing presentation by
staff and applicant.
Mayor Krauss: made comment on the need to amend the motion to adopt the findings on the variance
request separately from subdivision. He noted the Wetlands Review Board approved it so, the problem he had was that he is not aware of hard and fast rules on 100 foot lots.
President McSpadden: continued discussion on this item. I would incorporate the findings in the staff
report specific to the variance that that is included as part of our discussion. Are there any further
comments on the variance? No further discussion on the variance, 7-8 in favor Mayor Krauss oppose.
President McSpadden: Now we’ll need a motion for the subdivision application itself.
Mr. Pape: I move having reviewed the application materials, considered public comment, and the staff
analysis, I hereby adopt the findings presented in staff report for application P13046 and move to approve the amended plat of Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision with conditions and subject to all
applicable code provisions. Mr. Thompson seconded motion.
President McSpadden: does anyone want to speak on the motion?
Mr. Pape: this is a good approach to if you have a set of uses in an area that isn’t selling and how do
you reconfigure it for a more appropriate set of uses that is considerate of what is happening in
neighborhood and that would complete the neighborhood. I am very happy to vote for this application.
Mayor Krauss: spoke on the original plan of density per acre and how this type density neighborhoods are coming back into the city and he is really happy to see it.
President McSpadden: any more discussion? No further comment so with that I will take a vote. The
motion passed unanimously. This will be on the commissions agenda on March 3, 2014 @ 6pm.
ITEM 6. ELECTION OF OFFICERS & NEW BUSINESS
• Re-election of President McSpadden and Vice President Garberg.
• Mr. Pape indicated he wasn’t getting packets early enough especially when there is a holiday on Monday. Mr. Rogers stated he would bring this up at the staff meeting with the Community
Development Director Thursday.
• Mr. McSpadden continued discussion on this item
• Mr. Pape questioned the time of Planning Board and Zoning Commission meeting
• Mayor Krauss discussed some changes to streamline policies/processes
• President McSpadden suggested policy/work items.
241
Page 5 of 5
City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of February 18, 2014.
ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT
Seeing there is no further business before Planning Board, President McSpadden adjourned the meeting
at 8:15 p.m.
Trever McSpadden, President Tom Rogers, Associate Planner
Planning Board Department of Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman
242
243
244
245
246
247
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834
3
1
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
PRELIMINARY PLAT
AMENDED PLAT MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A
248
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834
3
2
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
PRELIMINARY PLAT
AMENDED PLAT MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1B
249
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834
3
3
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
PRELIMINARY PLAT
AMENDED PLAT MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
250
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
Proposed Subdivision Variance
Per the requirements of the Unified Development Code, the following variance is requested for the
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision.
Section 38.23.100 Watercourse Setback – The Applicant requests a variance to reduce the
wetland setback to less than 50’ as dimensioned on the attached Wetland Setback Variance Map
adjacent to Lots 7 through 10, Block 1. The minimum requested setback is 35.3’, the average
setback width along Lots 7 – 10 is 45’.
The Applicant requests this variance to permit the development of parcels with dimensions that are
efficient and reasonable for the construction of single-family homes.
The need for this variance is caused by:
A wetland mitigation area that was constructed after the initial development of Meadow Creek
Phase 1 Subdivision. The mitigation wetland was constructed to close to the property line and
was also constructed with an irregular boundary. To provide a constant 50’ off-set along Lots 7 –
10 would create shallow lots with an irregular boundary that would be difficult to maintain.
Mitigation:
Where practical the 50’ setback has been provided, with an average setback width of 45’. As
shown on the attached map a gravel trail has been constructed parallel to the east property line of
the project within the adjoining open space. This trail was constructed several years ago by the
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. The trail is well established and is a permitted use within
Zone 2 of the setback per Section 38.23.100(2.)(e.) of the UDO. The intent of allowing the trail
within the setback is that it provides a defined boundary between the upland and wetland areas.
The trailed is proposed to be left “as is” and will serve as the general topographic boundary
between the home and the wetland areas.
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE #1-1WETLANDS VARIANCE MAP
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
Proposed Subdivision Variance
Per the requirements of the Unified Development Code, the following variance is requested for the
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. The applicant’s response to requirements is
provided in italicized font.
Section 38.23.100 Watercourse Setback – The Applicant requests a variance to reduce the
wetland setback to less than 50’ as dimensioned on the attached Wetland Setback Variance Map
adjacent to Lots 7 through 10, Block 1. The minimum requested setback is 35.3’, the average
setback width along Lots 7 – 10 is 45’.
The Applicant requests this variance to permit the development of parcels with dimensions that are
efficient and reasonable for the construction of single-family homes.
The need for this variance is caused by:
A wetland mitigation area that was constructed after the initial development of Meadow Creek
Phase 1 Subdivision, the mitigation wetland was constructed to close to the property line and was
also constructed with an irregular boundary. Providing a constant 50’ off-set along Lots 7 – 10
would create shallow lots with an irregular boundary that would be difficult to maintain.
Mitigation:
Where practical the 50’ setback has been provided, with an average setback width of 45’. As
shown on the attached map a gravel trail has been constructed parallel to the east property line
of the project within the adjoining open space. This trail was constructed several years ago by the
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. The trail is well established and is a permitted use within
Zone 2 of the setback per Section 38.23.100(2.)(e.) of the UDO. The intent of allowing the trail
within the setback is that it provides a defined boundary between the upland and wetland areas.
The trailed is proposed to be left “as is” and will serve as the general topographic boundary
between the home and the wetland areas.
Response to Sec. 38.35.060. Zoning variances.
C: Criteria for consideration and decision. In acting on an application for a variance, the review
authority shall designate such lawful conditions as will secure substantial protection for the public
health, safety and general welfare, and shall issue written decisions setting forth factual evidence
that the variance meets the standards of MCA 76-2-323 in that the variance:
1. Will not be contrary to and will serve the public interest; The proposed variance
meets the intent of the existing ordinance and is not contrary to public interest. The
variance maintains the current wetland buffer between the mitigated wetlands and the
gravel trail and serves the public interest by the continued utilization of the existing gravel
253
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
trail. The existing gravel trail provides a defined topographic boundary between the
single-family lots and the wetland buffer.
2. Is necessary, owing to conditions unique to the property, to avoid an unnecessary
hardship which would unavoidably result from the enforcement of the literal meaning of
this chapter: The need for the requested variance is unique to the property due to the shape
of the property, proximity to a water course and a wetland mitigation area installed by a
third party prior to ownership by the applicant.
· Shape of property – The width of the existing property is narrow such that if a full
width wetland setback (50’) is applied it will adversely affect lot depth verses the
requested buffer width of 35’ (minimum) which will allow a more typical lot depth
of approximately 100’.
· Water course – Property is adjacent to a common open space which includes a
water course.
· Wetland mitigation – After the platting of the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision
which created the subject parcel a wetland mitigation area was permitted and
installed by a third party. The mitigation area was installed too close to the
property line so that a 50’ buffer encroached onto the property.
a. Hardship does not include difficulties arising from actions, or otherwise
be self-imposed, by the applicant or previous predecessors in interest, or potential
for greater financial returns; and
b. Conditions unique to the property may include, but are not limited to,
slope, presence of watercourses, after the fact imposition of additional
regulations on previously lawful lots, and governmental actions outside of the
owners control;
3. Will observe the spirit of this chapter, including the adopted growth policy, and
do substantial justice; The proposed variance meets the spirit of the existing ordinance.
The requested variance provides a wetland buffer between the mitigated wetlands and the
gravel trail to protect the wetlands. It also provides continued use of the existing gravel
trail. This trail provides for recreation and a topographic boundary between the single-
family lots and the wetland buffer.
4. In addition to the criteria specified above, in the case of a variance relating to the
flood hazard provisions of article 31 of this chapter: Not applicable, requested variance is
not related to flood hazard.
254
406-586-8834 ■ 406-586-1730 (fax) ■ 2090 Stadium Drive ■ Bozeman, Montana 59715 ■ www.dowlhkm.com
Alaska - Anchorage, Juneau, Ketchikan, Kodiak, Palmer ■ Arizona - Tucson, Tempe ■ Montana - Billings, Bozeman, Butte, Great Falls, Helena, Miles City
North Dakota - Dickinson ■ Washington - Redmond ■ Wyoming - Gillette, Lander, Laramie, Sheridan
December 11, 2013
Rec. No. 4522.11252.01
Brian Krueger
Planning Office
City of Bozeman
P.O. Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771
RE: Preliminary Plat Application
Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision Phase 1
Dear Mr. Krueger:
On behalf of DA Land Company, LLC, DOWL HKM is pleased to submit the attached preliminary plat
application for Amended Plat of Lots 8-15, Block 5 & Lots 14-18, Block 9, Meadow Creek Subdivision
Phase 1 (hereafter referred to as Amended Plat Meadow Creek (APMC)).
Amended Plat Meadow Creek - Preliminary Plat Application
The following is a detailed listing of the Preliminary Plat Submittal requirements for APMC. APMC is a
two (2) phase (Phases 1A & 1B), 42 lot single-family subdivision.
The intent of the following outline is to direct the review agency to the location of required plat
information within this application.
Text in red is DOWL HKM’s response to each item.
Sec. 38.41.040. - Subdivision preliminary plat.
A. The preliminary plat
1. Pre-application information. A copy of the pre-application information and staff letter
is included within Appendix 1.
2. Subdivision information. The Preliminary Plat provided in Appendix 2 includes the
following information.
Name and location of the subdivision
scale, scale bar, north arrow
date of preparation
lots and blocks
dimensions and area of each lot
255
Brian Krueger
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December 11, 2013
2
3. Streets, roads and grades. All streets and easements; The Preliminary Plat included in
Appendix 2 includes the following information. All street grades are less than 5%.
width of the right-of-way,
curvature of each
street names;
4. Adjoining subdivisions. The names of adjoining platted subdivisions and numbers of
adjoining certificates of survey. The Adjoining Subdivision Map provided in Appendix 3
provides adjoining subdivisions and certificate of surveys.
5. Adjoining owners. Names and addresses of record owners of lots and tracts
immediately adjoining the proposed subdivision. Attached in Appendix 1 is adjoining
ownership list.
6. Perimeter survey. An approximate survey of the exterior boundaries of the platted tract
with bearings, distances, and curve data indicated outside of the boundary lines.
Perimeter boundary survey is shown on the Preliminary Plat in Appendix 2.
7. Section corner. The approximate location of all section corners or legal subdivision
corners of sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary. Section corners are shown on
Preliminary Plat.
8. Phased improvements. If the improvements required are to be completed in phases
after the final plat is filed, the approximate area of each phase shall be shown on the plat.
See Phasing Plan in Appendix 3. The project is proposed to be completed in two phases.
9. Contours. Ground contours shall be provided for the tract according to the following
requirements: Contours are shown on the Preliminary Plat.
10. Waivers. List of waivers granted from the requirements of section 38.41.060 during
the preapplication process shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application. A
partial waiver to the supplemental information requirements was granted through the pre-
application process. The partial waiver is detailed in Mr. Krueger’s 9/25/13
Memorandum to DRC in the pre-application materials located in Appendix 1 of this
application.
11. Request for exemption from department of environmental quality review. APMC does
not request an exemption from Montana Department of Environmental Quality review.
256
Brian Krueger
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December 11, 2013
3
Sec. 38.41.050. - Preliminary plat supplements required for all subdivisions.
A. The following supplemental information shall be submitted with the preliminary plat.
1. Area map. A map showing all adjacent sections of land, subdivision, certificates of survey, streets and
roads. An area map is included in appendix See Area Map in Appendix 3.
2. Subdivision map. Map of entire subdivision on an 8½-by-11-inch, 8½-by-14-inch, or 11-by-17-inch
sheet. A reduced copy of the Preliminary Plat is included in Appendix 2.
3. Variances. A written statement describing any requested subdivision variance and the facts of hardship
upon which the request is based (refer to article 35 of this chapter). The following variance was requested
with the pre-application submittal and is also requested with the preliminary plat application.
Section 38.23.100 Watercourse setback – we request a variance to reduce the wetland setback to less
than 50’ adjacent to Lots 7 through 10, Block 1. See variance request narrative and mapping in Appendix
1.
4. Property owners. A certified list of adjoining property owners, their mailing addresses and property
description, including property owners across public rights-of-way and/or easements. The names and
addresses shall also be provided on self-adhesive mailing labels, one set of labels for first minor
subdivisions or subdivisions eligible for summary review, and three sets of labels for all other
subdivisions. Attached in Appendix 1 is adjoining ownership list.
5. Documents and certificates. Draft copy of the following documents, and certificates to be printed on or
to accompany the preliminary plat: Certificates are included on sheet 3 of the Preliminary Plat, Appendix
2.
a. Covenants, restrictions and articles of incorporation for the property owners association. APMC
proposes to join the existing West Winds HOA and use the existing filed Meadow Creek Phase 1
Covenants and Design guidelines. A copy of the filed covenants are provided on the attached CD.
b. Encroachment permits or a letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new streets, easements,
rights-of-way or driveways intersect state, county or city highways, streets or roads. Encroachment Permit
or letter not required. Proposed roads will connect to City streets and will be reviewed by City
Engineering Department.
c. A letter of approval or preliminary approval from the city where a zoning change is necessary. NA, no
zone change proposed, subdivision per base zoning (R3).
d. A draft of such other appropriate certificates. Certificates are shown on sheet 3 of preliminary plat.
e. Provision for maintenance of all streets (including emergency access), parks, and other required
improvements if not dedicated to the public, or if private. All road right-of-ways shall be dedicated to
public. Public common open space shall be maintained per Meadow Creek covenants.
6. Street profile sheets. Profile sheets for street grades greater than five percent. NA – all streets less than
5% grade.
257
Brian Krueger
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December 11, 2013
4
7. Application and fee. Completed preliminary plat application form, with the original signatures of all
owners of record or their authorized representatives, and the required review fee. If an authorized
representative signs on behalf of an owner of record, a copy of the authorization shall be provided. Signed
application and fee are included in Appendix 1.
8. Noxious weed management and revegetation plan. Noxious weeds shall be controlled in all
developments as directed by the county weed control district (district) in accordance with the Montana
County Noxious Weed Control Act (MCA 7-22-21). The developer shall have any noxious weeds
identified and their location mapped by a person with experience in weed management and
knowledgeable in weed identification. A noxious weed management and revegetation plan approved by
the district for control of noxious weeds shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application. This
plan shall ensure the control of noxious weeds upon preliminary plat approval and the revegetation of any
land disturbed during the construction of subdivision improvements. An up-date weed plan is included
Appendix 5.
9. Sanitation information. When the subdivision does not qualify for the certification established in
section 38.03.050 the subdivider shall provide the information regarding sanitation set forth in MCA 76-
3-622. NA – water and sewer service to be provided by connection to City services.
Item 1. – Plat Supplements
Below is UDO Section 38.41.060 regarding additional plat supplements with detail addressing each item
and providing explanation on why the provided material is valid.
A partial waiver to the supplemental information was granted with the pre-application plan review for: 1)
groundwater, 2) geology-soils-slopes, 3) vegetation, 4) wildlife, 5)historic features, 6) agriculture,
agricultural water user facilities, 8) educational facilities, 9) land use, 10) neighborhood center, 11)
miscellaneous, and 12) affordable housing. See Appendix 3 for the responses to Plat Supplements.
Sec. 38.41.060. - Additional subdivision preliminary plat supplements.
1. Surface water. – See Appendix 3.
2. Floodplains. – See Appendix 3. Copy of the Meadow Creek Subdivision Flood Study Report, August
30, 2005, Allied Engineering is included on the attached CD.
3. Groundwater. – See Appendix 3.
4. Geology; soils; slopes. – See Appendix 3.
5. Vegetation. – See Appendix 3.
6. Wildlife. – See Appendix 3.
7. Historical features. – See Appendix 3.
8. Agriculture. – See Appendix 3.
258
Brian Krueger
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December 11, 2013
5
9. Agricultural water user facilities. – See Appendix 3.
10. Water and sewer. – See Appendix 3.
11. Stormwater management. – See Appendix 3.
12. Streets, roads and alleys. See Road Plan in Appendix 3 and Traffic Impact Study in Appendix 7.
13. Utilities. – See Appendix 3.
14. Educational facilities. – See Appendix 3
15. Land use. – See Appendix 3
16. Parks and recreation facilities. – See Appendix 3
17. Neighborhood center plan. – See Appendix 3
18. Lighting plan. – See Appendices 3 & 10.
19. Miscellaneous. – See Appendices 3.
20. Affordable housing. Not applicable – ordinance currently suspended.
Pre-Application Elements
The following are DOWL HKM’s responses to the pre-application letter comments included in Appendix
1.
Planning Department Comments
1. Supplemental information, see Appendix 3 for supplemental information.
2. See Appendix 9 for updated park area calculations.
3. APMC proposes to join the existing Meadow Creek HOA and pay proportionate share for park
and open space maintenance.
4. No park land area dedication proposed by this project. APMC will utilize park area dedicated by
the original Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision. Open space parcels will be designated as
common open space owned by the property owners association.
5. So noted, no park land area dedication proposed by project.
6. As with the original Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision, APMC will use the park area as the
“Neighborhood Center”.
7. See Appendix 4 for covenants.
8. It is understood that the developer is required to landscape open space and boulevard strips on
perimeter roads. See Appendix 9 for landscape plan.
9. See Appendix 5 for Weed Plan.
259
Brian Krueger
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December 11, 2013
6
The “Standard Code Provisions” and “Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements” discussed within the
pre-application letter have been reviewed and are understood.
Engineering Department Comments:
1. A Storm Water Master Plan is included in Appendix 3.
2. A Storm Water Management Permit will be submitted and approved prior to any construction.
3. Existing water and sewer services will be properly abandoned.
4. Water rights and cash-in-lieu were paid in association with the Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision (see cash-in-lieu worksheet on attached CD). Meadow Creek Phase 1 paid cash-in-
lieu for 404 dwelling units, of which, APMC and an original allocation of 89 dwelling units. As
proposed APMC will have 42 dwelling units.
5. Existing and proposed water / sewer mains will be depicted on the civil improvement plans.
6. Plans and specification will be prepared and signed by a Montana Professional Engineer. Plans
will be approved by MDEQ and City prior to construction.
7. A one-foot no access strip is shown on South 27th Avenue.
8. A Traffic Impact Study is included in Appendix 7.
9. Location of mailboxes will be coordinated with Engineering Office.
10. A lighting plan is included in Appendix 10.
11. Lot addresses will be coordinated with Engineers Office.
If you have any questions or require additional information please feel free to contact our office.
Sincerely,
DOWL HKM
_______________________________________
Clint Litle, P.E.
Senior Project Manager
260
261
262
263
264
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS
AMENDED PLAT MEADOW CREEK PHASE 1 SUBDIVISION HOMEOWNERS’
ASSOCIATION, INC.
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision proposes to utilize the existing Meadow
Creek Phase 1 Subdivision Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CCR’s) as recorded with the
Gallatin County Clerks and Recorder’s office. A copy of the aforementioned covenants are
provided on the attached compact disk.
265
AMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1Awww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834LANDSCAPINGMAPFIGURE#1266
AMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1Bwww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834LANDSCAPINGMAPFIGURE#2267
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE S-18LIGHTING PLAN
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
1 Table of Contents
Traffic Impact Study
Amended Plat
Meadow Creek Subdivision
Pr e p ar e d By:
DO W L HK M
2 09 0 S t adi u m Dri v e
Bo z e m a n, M T 5 97 15
1 2 / 9 / 2 0 1 3
P r e par e d F o r :
DA L an d C o m pan y, L L C
18 71 s . 2 2
n d Ave nue
B o z e m an, M T 59 718
279
Traffic Impact Study
For
Amended Plat
Meadow Creek Subdivision
D O W L HK M # 11 2 5 2. 01
\ \ B z n -fs \e n g \22 \ 1 12 5 2 \ Tr a ffi c I m p a c t St u d y
Bozeman, MT
Prepared by:
Todd Cormier, P.E., PTOE, AVS
David Stoner, AICP
280
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
3 Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 5
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 8
Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................ 10
Area Roadways and Site Access ......................................................................................................... 10
Study Intersections ............................................................................................................................ 10
Traffic Projections ................................................................................................................................. 12
Background Traffic Data .................................................................................................................... 12
Build-out Year .................................................................................................................................... 16
Trip Generation ................................................................................................................................. 19
Trip Distributions and Assignments .................................................................................................... 20
Operational Analysis .............................................................................................................................. 25
Intersection Capacity and Level of Service ......................................................................................... 25
Mitigation Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 26
Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 28
Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... 29
List of Figures
Figure 1. Area Map .................................................................................................................................. 9
Figure 2. Existing and Proposed Lane Configurations and Control .......................................................... 11
Figure 3. Existing (2014) AM Peak Hour Traffic....................................................................................... 14
Figure 4. Existing (2014) PM Peak Hour Traffic ....................................................................................... 15
Figure 5. Background (2017) AM Peak Hour Traffic ................................................................................ 17
Figure 6. Background (2017) PM Peak Hour Traffic ................................................................................ 18
Figure 7. Distribution and AM Project Trips ........................................................................................... 21
Figure 8. Distribution and PM Project Trips ............................................................................................ 22
Figure 9. Background (2017) with Project Trips AM Peak Hour............................................................... 23
Figure 10. Background (2017) with Project Trips PM Peak Hour ............................................................. 24
281
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
4 Table of Contents
List of Tables
Table 1 AM and PM Peak Hours of the Study Intersections ................................................................. 12
Table 2 Existing (2014) 24-hour Count Data ........................................................................................ 13
Table 3 Trip Generation ...................................................................................................................... 19
Table 4 Projected (2017) 24-hour Count Data plus Project Build-out Trips ........................................... 20
Table 5 LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections .............................................................................. 25
Table 6 Existing and Projected Operations .......................................................................................... 26
Table 7 LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections .................................................................................. 27
Table 8 Projected (2017) Signalized Operations – South 19th Avenue and Graf Street .......................... 27
Appendices
Appendix 1 ...................................................................................................... Field Collected Traffic Data
Appendix 2 ............................................................................................. Operational Analysis Worksheets
282
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
5 Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This traffic impact study (TIS) evaluates potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed
modification of the Meadow Creek subdivision development plan. The proposed modification to the
approved subdivision plan entails the construction of 42 single-family detached housing units in lieu of
89 multi-family dwellings units, resulting in a net decrease of traffic from the approved subdivision plan.
The TIS JCD Residential Development Meadow Creek Subdivision, 2005 prepared by Robert Peccia &
Associates analyzed traffic impacts associated with the initial development plan (See attached CD for
copy of TIS JCD Residential Development Meadow Creek Subdivision, 2005).
The proposed development site is located to the southwest of the South 19th Avenue and Graf Street
intersection, within the area bounded by Graf Street on the north, South 19th Avenue on the east,
Blackwood Road on the South, and South 27th Avenue on the west in Bozeman, MT. The development
of this site is expected to begin in 2014 and be completed in 2017. Access to the proposed development
will be provided through the existing street network, and primarily through Graf Street and Enterprise
Boulevard. A vicinity map depicting the location of the development relative to the Bozeman area
transportation system is depicted in Figure 1.
The City of Bozeman Engineering Division was contacted to determine the scope of analysis required for
this TIS. It was determined this study should verify traffic demands on the following intersections:
1. Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street
2. South 19th Avenue and Graf Street
A depiction of the immediate study area, existing and proposed lane configurations and control are
presented in Figure 2.
Morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak hour intersection turning movement counts for the study
intersection of Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street were collected on Thursday October 17, 2013. AM
and PM peak hour intersection turning movement counts for the study intersection of South 19th
Avenue and Graf Street were collected on Wednesday, October 23, 2013. The study intersections peak
hour turning movement volumes were collected in late 2013. However, in order to accurately reflect a
three year development period, existing conditions will be referred to as 2014 with project build-out
conditions identified as 2017.
In addition to the peak hour turning movement counts, 24-hour automatic tube counters were installed
to collect traffic volume data at mid-block locations on Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street. The
counters on Enterprise Boulevard collected data for consecutive days beginning Thursday, October 17,
2013 and ending on Friday, October 18, 2013. The counters on Graf Street collected data for consecutive
days beginning on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 and ending on Thursday October 17, 2013. Similar to
the peak hour turning movement volumes the 24-hour mid-block counts were collected in late 2013.
However, in order to accurately reflect a three year development period, existing conditions will be
referred to as 2014 with project build-out conditions identified as 2017. The 24-hour count data for the
283
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
6 Executive Summary
roadway segments were averaged for a single 24-hour period, and are provided in Appendix 1 of this
report. Table 2 presents the 24-hour count data.
In order to analyze potential traffic impacts of the proposed development, it is necessary to estimate
and analyze future traffic conditions in the area without the proposed development. The development
site is located on the south side of Bozeman and is expected to experience continued growth through
the proposed development build-out year of 2017. Future traffic conditions in the area were estimated
by reviewing Montana Department of Transportation traffic count stations on South 19th Avenue near
the proposed development, which indicated an approximate 2.0% annual average growth rate since
2008. As such, 2.0% annual growth rate was applied to the peak-hour existing turning volumes at the
study intersections to reflect build-out year (2017) volumes, which could be expected through a
sustained and constant area growth without the site-generated traffic. These volumes are represented
within Figure 5 and Figure 6.
Project trip generation is based on nationally accepted trip generation rates contained in the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Trips were generated for the
expected type of development, and correspond to the AM and PM peak hour of the adjacent roadway
network. The site is expected to be developed entirely as single-family detached housing. This type of
development is most closely represented by ITE’s Single-Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210).
Intersection capacity analyses were conducted using the procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity
Manual 2010 (HCM), as appropriate, and through the use of SYNCHRO 8 traffic operational analysis
software based on HCM delay, capacity, and level-of-service calculations. Synchro reports for the
analyses are contained in Appendix 2 of this report.
The Bozeman Municipal Code Section 38.24.060.A.4 states “All arterial and collector streets and
intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless
specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the
methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual.”
Upon Build-out of proposed development, the intersection approach with the longest delay at the study
intersections can be expected to operate at a satisfactory LOS C or better in the AM and PM peak hours,
with the exception of the eastbound approach at South 19th Avenue and Graf Street in the PM Peak
Hour. This intersection is currently set up as a signalized intersection, however flashing yellow lights and
flashing red lights are displayed on the major and minor approaches, respectively, operating as a minor
leg stop control intersection. The previously approved TIS (JCD Residential Development Meadow Creek
Subdivision, 2005) for the subdivision recommended installing a traffic signal at this intersection. Traffic
operational analysis indicates with the implementation of a signalized timing plan the intersection of
South 19th Avenue and Graf Street is projected to operate at LOC A in 2017 with the proposed site
generated traffic. As such, the implementation of a signalized timing plan at the intersection of South
19th Avenue and Graf Street is recommended.
The analysis presented herein indicates the proposed development site-generated traffic can be
adequately accommodated by the existing roadway network adjacent to the site through the proposed
284
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
7 Executive Summary
buildout year of the development (2017). This estimate of LOS is based on worst-case site trip
generation of the proposed development. Considering the proposed development site-generated traffic
is not expected to cause the study intersections to fall below the acceptable LOS C by 2017, no other
traffic control improvements to the existing street network are considered necessary for the
development of the Meadow Creek subdivision.
285
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
8 Introduction
INTRODUCTION
This traffic impact study (TIS) evaluates potential traffic impacts associated with a proposed
modification of the Meadow Creek subdivision development plan. The existing subdivision is located to
the southwest of the South 19th Avenue and Graf Street intersection, within the area bounded by Graf
Street on the north, South 19th Avenue on the east, Blackwood Road on the South, and South 27th
Avenue on the west in Bozeman, MT.
The proposed modification to the approved subdivision plan entails the construction of 42 single-family
detached housing units in lieu of 89 multi-family dwellings units, resulting in a net decrease of traffic
from the approved subdivision plan. The TIS JCD Residential Development Meadow Creek Subdivision,
2005 prepared by Robert Peccia & Associates analyzed traffic impacts associated with the initial
development plan (See attached CD for copy of TIS JCD Residential Development Meadow Creek
Subdivision, 2005).
Access to the proposed development will be provided through the existing street network, and primarily
though Graf Street and Enterprise Boulevard. The immediate surrounding area generally incorporates
agricultural and residential land uses. A vicinity map depicting the location of the development relative
to the Bozeman area transportation system is depicted in Figure 1.
The construction is expected to begin in 2014 and is expected to occur over three years with completion
by December 2017. A more detailed discussion of the proposed development is included within the
body of this report.
286
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
9 Introduction
Figure 1. Area Map
287
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
10 Existing Conditions
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Area Roadways and Site Access
Regional access to the development will be provided through the area's existing roadway network.
Direct access will be provided through Graf Street and Enterprise Boulevard via South 19th Avenue.
Study Intersections
The City of Bozeman Engineering Division was contacted to determine the scope of analysis required for
this TIS. It was determined this TIS should verify traffic demands on the following intersections:
1. Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street
2. South 19th Avenue and Graf Street
No additional intersections were identified for review.
A depiction of the immediate study area as well as existing and proposed lane configurations and
control are presented in Figure 2. The intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street is currently
signalized but is operating in flashing mode with flashing yellow lights and flashing red lights displayed
on the major (South 19th Avenue) and minor (Gaff Street) approaches, respectively, operating as a minor
leg stop control intersection.
288
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
11 Existing Conditions
Figure 2. Existing and Proposed Lane Configurations and Control
289
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
12 Traffic Projections
TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS
Background Traffic Data
Morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak hour intersection turning movement counts were collected
between the hours of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and between 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM, respectively. The peak
hours of the study intersections were determined based on the highest consecutive 15-minute turning
movement counts. AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement counts for the study
intersection of Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street were collected on Thursday, October 17, 2013. AM
and PM peak hour intersection turning movement counts for the study intersection of South 19th
Avenue and Graf Street were collected on Wednesday, October 23, 2013. The peak hour turning
movement volumes were collected in late 2013. However, in order to accurately reflect a three year
development period, existing conditions will be referred to as 2014 with project build-out conditions
identified as 2017. The raw and refined peak hour turning movement data for the study intersections is
provided in Appendix 1 of this report. Peak-hour turning movement data is summarized in Figure 3 and
Figure 4. Table 1 lists the AM and PM peak hours for the study intersections.
Table 1 AM and PM Peak Hours of the Study Intersections
Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
1 South 19th Avenue and Graf Street 7:45 – 8:45 5:00 – 6:00
2 Enterprise Boulevard and Graf
Street 7:15 – 8:15 4:45 – 5:45
Source: DOWL HKM, 2013
In addition to the peak hour turning movement counts, 24-hour automatic tube counters were installed
to collect traffic volume data at mid-block locations on Enterprise Boulevard and Graf Street. The
counters on Enterprise Boulevard collected data for consecutive days beginning Thursday, October 17,
2013 and ending on Friday, October 18, 2013. The counters on Graf Street collected data for consecutive
days beginning on Wednesday, October 16, 2013 and ending on Thursday October 17, 2013. Similar to
the peak hour turning movement volumes the 24-hour mid-block counts were collected in late 2013.
However, in order to accurately reflect a three year development period, existing conditions will be
referred to as 2014 with project build-out conditions identified as 2017. The 24-hour count data for the
roadway segments were averaged for a single 24-hour period, and are provided in Appendix 1 of this
report. Table 2 presents the 24-hour count data.
290
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
13 Traffic Projections
Table 2 Existing (2014) 24-hour Count Data
Location 24-Hour
Count Directional Splits
Enterprise Boulevard north of Graf Street 350 vpd 50% Northbound
50% Southbound
Graf Street East of Enterprise Boulevard 1,100 vpd 49% Eastbound
51% Westbound
Source: DOWL HKM, 2013
VPD = Vehicles per day
291
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
14 Traffic Projections
Figure 3. Existing (2014) AM Peak Hour Traffic
292
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
15 Traffic Projections
Figure 4. Existing (2014) PM Peak Hour Traffic
293
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
16 Traffic Projections
Build-out Year
In order to analyze potential traffic impacts of the proposed development, it is necessary to estimate
and analyze future traffic conditions in the area without the proposed development. The development
site is located on the south side of Bozeman and is expected to experience continued growth through
the proposed development build-out year of 2017. Future traffic conditions in the area were estimated
by reviewing Montana Department of Transportation traffic count stations on South 19th Avenue near
the proposed development, which indicated an approximate 2.0% annual average growth rate since
2008. As such, 2.0% annual growth rate was applied to the peak-hour existing turning volumes at the
study intersections to reflect build-out year (2017) volumes, which could be expected through a
sustained and constant area growth without the site-generated traffic. These volumes are represented
within Figure 5 and Figure 6. Turning movement volumes less than five vehicles were modified to five to
reflect an increase in future traffic volumes.
The assumed area growth rate, by definition, includes a certain level of sustained future development
within the area, which in turn implies inclusion of such developments as the Meadow Creek subdivision.
Therefore, the future traffic volumes contained within this report should be considered as a
conservative “worst-case” analysis. The determination of an annual growth rate is based on historical
traffic and area growth trends, which tends to rely heavily on past performance and gives little
consideration to future conditions. Over time, growth rates generally do not exhibit a straight line
growth, but rather tend to level off as the surrounding area develops. As such, the use of a straight line
growth rate for the prediction of future events can be thought of as highly conservative and should be
considered as such when reviewing the output of this analysis.
294
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
17 Traffic Projections
Figure 5. Background (2017) AM Peak Hour Traffic
295
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
18 Traffic Projections
Figure 6. Background (2017) PM Peak Hour Traffic
296
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
19 Traffic Projections
Trip Generation
Project trip generation is based on nationally accepted trip generation rates contained in the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 9th Edition, 2012. Trips were generated for the
expected type of development, and correspond to the AM and PM peak hour of the adjacent roadway
network.
The proposed development is expected to be constructed over three years. Construction is expected to
begin in early 2014 with completion (project build-out) expected by December 2017. For the purpose of
this report, the build-out condition will be addressed assuming the development will be completed by
2017.
The site is expected to be developed entirely as single-family detached housing. This type of
development is most closely represented by ITE’s Single-Family Detached Housing (ITE Code 210).
Table 3 presents trip generation estimates for the proposed developments, which are based on ITE
fitted curve equations.
Table 3 Trip Generation
Land Use
ITE
Code 1 Quantity
Weekday
Trip Ends 3
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Trips 4 % In % Out Trips
In
Trips
Out
Trips 5 % In % Out Trips
In
Trips
Out
Single-Family
Detached
Housing
210 42 DU 2 473 39 25% 75% 10 29 48 63% 37% 30 18
Total Trips 473 39 10 29 48 30 18
1 Institue of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Handbook, 9th Edition, 2012
2 DU = Dwelling Units
3 Based on fitted curve equation: Ln(T) = 0.92 Ln(X) + 2.72
4 Based on fitted curve equation: Ln(T) = 0.70 Ln(X) + 9.74
5 Based on fitted curve equation: Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 0.51
297
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
20 Traffic Projections
Trip Distributions and Assignments
Trip distribution percentages for this TIS was based on the previously approved TIS (JCD Residential
Development Meadow Creek Subdivision, 2005) for the subdivision, the expected directions of travel to
nearby exiting commercial and office developments, and the roadway circulation system in the area.
At build-out, site trips are expected to enter/exit the study area by way of Enterprise Boulevard or Graf
Street. Approximately 33% of all the project build-out trips generated by the site are expected to
enter/exit the study area using Enterprise Boulevard by way of Stucky Road. It is assumed these trips will
be heading to or coming from Bozeman. An additional 59% of all project trips are expected to enter/exit
the study area using Graf Street via South 19th Avenue. It is also assumed these trips will be heading to
or coming from Bozeman. Approximately 10% of all project trips are expected to enter/exit the site
using Graf Street and travel toward or be coming from destinations south of the study area using South
19th Avenue. Project build-out trips and distribution characteristics are presented in Figure 7 and Figure
8.
Project build-out trips have been added to the background traffic to yield anticipated peak hour build-
out traffic demands at the study intersections. These volumes are represented in Figure 9 and Figure 10.
Background 2017 ADT is based on a 2.0% annual growth to the background 2014 ADT and overlaid on
the projected peak hour trips to reflect daily build-out 2017 traffic volumes. Daily build-out 2017 traffic
volume (background traffic plus site-generated traffic) estimates are presented in Table 4.
Table 4 Projected (2017) 24-hour Count Data plus Project Build-out Trips
Location 24-Hour
Count Directional Splits
Enterprise Boulevard north of Graf Street 400 vpd 50% Northbound
50% Southbound
Graf Street East of Enterprise Boulevard 1,220 vpd 49% Eastbound
51% Westbound
Source: DOWL HKM, 2013
VPD = Vehicles per day
298
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
21 Traffic Projections
Figure 7. Distribution and AM Project Trips
299
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
22 Traffic Projections
Figure 8. Distribution and PM Project Trips
300
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
23 Traffic Projections
Figure 9. Background (2017) with Project Trips AM Peak Hour
301
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
24 Traffic Projections
Figure 10. Background (2017) with Project Trips PM Peak Hour
302
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
25 Operational Analysis
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Intersection Capacity and Level of Service
Intersection capacity analyses were conducted using the procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity
Manual 2010 (HCM), as appropriate, and through the use of SYNCHRO 8 traffic operational analysis
software based on HCM delay, capacity, and level-of-service calculations. Synchro reports for the
analyses are contained in Appendix 2 of this report.
In accordance with HCM procedures, LOS has been determined by estimating the worst approach delay
of the unsignalized intersections. Table 5 presents the range of traffic delays associated for unsignalized
intersections.
Table 5 LOS Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections
LOS Unsignalized Intersection
Delay (sec / veh)
A £ 10
B > 10 to 15
C > 15 to 25
D > 25 to 35
E > 35 to 50
F > 50
Source: HCM 2010, Exhibit 19-1 LOS Criteria for
Unsignalized Intersections.
sec / veh = seconds per vehicle
The Bozeman Municipal Code Section 38.24.060.A.4 states “All arterial and collector streets and
intersections with arterial and collector streets shall operate at a minimum level of service "C" unless
specifically exempted by this subsection. Level of service (LOS) values shall be determined by using the
methods defined by the most recent edition of the Highway Capacity Manual.”
The analysis of the study intersections approaches with the longest delay indicates a satisfactory LOS C
or better under existing conditions during the AM and PM peak hours.
Upon Build-out of the proposed development, the study intersections approaches with the longest delay
can be expected to continue to operate at a satisfactory LOS C or better in the AM and PM peak hours,
with the exception of the eastbound approach at South 19th Avenue and Graf Street in the PM Peak
Hour. Table 6 presents existing and projected operations at the study intersections.
303
Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
26 Operational Analysis
Table 6 Existing and Projected Operations
Intersection Condition
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Unsignalized Unsignalized
Worst
Approach
Delay (sec)
HCM
LOS
Worst
Approach
Delay (sec)
HCM
LOS
1 Enterprise Boulevard
and Graff Street
Existing (2014) NB/SB 9.0 A SB 9.5 A
Background (2017) NB/SB 9.2 A SB 9.6 A
Background Plus
Project Trips (2017) SB 9.4 A SB 10.0 B
2 South 19th Avenue
and Graf Street
Existing (2014) EB 19.5 C EB 21.9 C
Background (2017) EB 21.5 C EB 24.7 C
Background Plus
Project Trips (2017) EB 23.6 C EB 28.0 D
Source: DOWL HKM, 2013
Mitigation Recommendations
Table 12 indicates the eastbound approach at the intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street,
analyzed with the existing minor leg stop control configuration; (Depicted in Figure 3) is projected to fall
below the acceptable LOS C by 2017 with the proposed site-generated traffic in the PM Peak Hour. This
intersection is currently set up as a signalized intersection, however flashing yellow lights and flashing
red lights are displayed on the major and minor approaches, respectively, operating as a minor leg stop
control intersection.
Due to the expected operations under the minor leg stop control, an operational analysis of the South
19th Avenue and Graf Street intersection under full signal control was performed. Delay thresholds for a
given LOS for unsignalized intersections are lower than those given for signalized intersections. This
difference, as explained in Chapter 19 of the 2010 HCM, is to account for the greater variability in delay
associated with unsignalized movements in addition to different driver exceptions associated with each
type of intersection control, with the expectation that signalized intersections are designed to carry
higher traffic volumes and therefore will experience greater delay than an unsignalized intersection.
In accordance with HCM procedures, LOS has been determined by estimating the average intersection
delay at the signalized intersection Table 7 presents the range of traffic delays associated for signalized
intersections.
304
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
27 Operational Analysis
Table 7 LOS Criteria for Signalized Intersections
LOS Signalized Intersection Delay
(sec / veh)
A £ 10
B > 10 to 20
C > 20 to 35
D > 35 to 55
E > 55 to 80
F > 80
Source: HCM 2010, Exhibit 18-4 LOS Criteria for
Signalized Intersections
sec / veh = seconds per vehicle
Table 8 presents projected (2017) signalized operations at the intersection of South 19th Avenue and
Graf Street with and without the proposed development site generated traffic.
Table 8 Projected (2017) Signalized Operations – South 19th Avenue and Graf Street
Intersection Condition
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Signalized Signalized
Ave.
Int.
Delay
V/C 1 LOS Ave.
Int.
Delay
V/C 1 LOS
2 South19th Avenue and Graf
Street
Background (2017) 6.3 0.51 A 5.3 0.34 A
Background Plus
Project Trips (2017) 7.1 0.52 A 5.9 0.39 A
1 Maximum volume to capacity ratio.
A traffic operational analysis indicates with the implementation of a signalized timing plan, the
intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street is projected to operate at LOC A through 2017 with
the proposed site generated traffic. As such, the implementation of a signalized timing plan at the
intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street is recommended. The previously approved TIS (JCD
Residential Development Meadow Creek Subdivision, 2005) for this subdivision recommended installing
a traffic signal at this intersection.
305
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
28 Conclusions and Recommendations
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The analysis presented herein indicates the proposed development site-generated traffic will not cause
the study intersections to fall below the acceptable LOS C by 2017. This estimate of LOS is based on the
most conservative, worst-case site trip generation of the site development. Analysis indicated the
eastbound approach to the intersection of South 19th Avenue and Graf Street, analyzed with the existing
minor leg stop control configuration; (Depicted in Figure 3) is projected to fall below the acceptable LOS
C by 2017 with the proposed site-generated traffic in the PM Peak Hour. This intersection is currently set
up as a signalized intersection, however flashing yellow lights and flashing red lights are displayed on the
major and minor approaches, respectively, operating as a minor leg stop control intersection. A traffic
operational analysis indicates with the implementation of a signalized timing plan, the intersection of
South 19th Avenue and Graf Street is projected to operate at LOC A through 2017 with the proposed site
development traffic. As such, the implementation of a signalized timing plan at the intersection of South
19th Avenue and Graf Street is recommended. Considering the proposed development site-generated
traffic is not expected to cause either of the study intersections to fall below LOS C by 2017, no other
traffic control improvements to the existing street network are considered necessary for the proposed
Meadow Creek development.
306
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Subdivision TIS December 9, 2013
29 Appendices
APPENDICES
307
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
1 – 1
Plat Supplement No. 1 – Surface Water
Text in red is DOWL HKM’s response to each item.
a.Mapping.Locate on a plat overlay or sketch map all surface waters and the
delineated floodplain which may affect or be affected by the proposed
subdivision including:The Preliminary Plat map in Appendix 2 shows the 100-
year flood boundary per the Meadow Creek Subdivision Flood Study Report,
August, 30, 2005, Allied Engineering. The aforementioned study determined the
100-year flood boundary, elevations and sized the conveyance elements of the
storm system to pass the 100-year flood event. In the case of APMC the 100-
year flood event is conveyed by an unnamed stream channel within the common
area adjacent to and east of APMC. The 100year flood event is contained within
the unnamed channel and does not impact the proposed APMC project. The
APMC does not propose to construct any improvements within the unnamed
stream channel or common area that would obstruct the 100-year flood event and
alter the flood boundaries. DOWL HKM has reviewed the Allied Engineering
flood study and finds the report to current and to match site conditions. See
attached CD for a full copy of the Meadow Creek Flood Study. The Meadow
Creek Flood Study was submitted to the City in conjunction with the Meadow
Creek Phase 1 Subdivision and is the current study for the area and has not been
superseded by any FEMA mapping per the FEMA Map Center. The Specific
FEMA Panel of interest (0814D) is labeled “Panel Not Printed – No Special
Flood Hazard Areas”.
(1) Natural water systems such as natural streams, creeks, stream/ditches,
drainages, waterways, gullies, ravines or washes in which water flows
either continuously or intermittently and has a definite channel, bed and
banks.As described in the aforementioned Meadow Creek Subdivision
Flood Study Report, the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision is drained
by a series of un-named stream channels and the subdivision was
designed so that the streams were located in undeveloped common areas
to minimize disruption to the riparian corridors. APMC does not propose
any alteration to the streams or common areas.
(2) Artificial water systems such as canals, ditches, ditch/streams,
aqueducts, reservoirs, irrigation or drainage systems.No artificial water
systems in the proximity of APMC.
b.Description.See attached CD for a copy of Meadow Creek Subdivision
Flood Study Report and Preliminary Plat Application.
(1) Describe all surface waters which may affect or be affected by the
proposed subdivision including name, approximate size, present use and
time of year when water is present.No surface water impacts are
308
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
1 – 2
anticipated by the project. The project does not propose any
encroachments or improvements within the adjacent common area and
stream corridor. Please note the adjoining perimeter roads, culverts and
utilities for this project were previously installed under USACOE Permit.
No additional wetland fill is proposed for this project.
(2) Describe proximity of proposed construction (such as buildings,
sewer systems, streets) to surface waters.All structures are located
beyond the required wetland setback.
c.Water body alteration.Describe any existing or proposed streambank
or shoreline alterations or any proposed construction or modification of
lake beds, watercourses or irrigation ditches. Provide information on
location, extent, type and purpose of alteration. Provide a revised
floodplain analysis report, in compliance with article 31 of this chapter,
as appropriate.No water body alterations are proposed anticipated by the
project.No fill of wetlands required.
d.Wetlands.If the subdivision contains wetlands, as defined in article 42 of this
chapter, then a delineation of the wetland shall be shown on the preliminary and
final plats.The wetlands are shown on the preliminary plat in Appendix 2. No
wetlands on-site, wetlands limited to adjoining common area. Project proposes
no encroachment or impact to these wetlands. Lynn Bacon with TerraQuatic,
LLC has visited the site and assisted with the research on the status of the
adjoining wetland mitigation. Attached in Appendix 6 is documentation of the
wetland mitigation area.
e.Permits.Include copies of any permits listed in section 38.41.020 that have
been obtained for the project.Copy of USACOE wetland permit is included in
Appendix 6 of the preliminary plat application
309
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE S-1.1
MIDDLE CREEK
DITCH
UNNAMED
STREAM CHANNEL
UNNAMEDSTREAM CHANNEL
SURFACE WATER MAP
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
310
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE S-1.2
WETLANDS
AREA
WETLANDS MAP
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
311
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
2 –1
Plat Supplement No. 2 – Floodplains
Text in red is DOWL HKM’s response to each item.
2.Floodplains.A floodplain analysis report shall be submitted with the preliminary plat in compliance
with article 31 of this chapter.Copy of the Meadow Creek Subdivision Flood Study Report, August 30,
2005, Allied Engineering is included on the attached CD.
DOWL HKM has reviewed the Allied Engineering flood study and finds the report to current and to
match site conditions. The Meadow Creek Flood Study was submitted to the City in conjunction with the
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision and is the current study for the area and has not been superseded by
any FEMA mapping per the FEMA Map Center. The Specific FEMA Panel of interest (0814D) is
labeled “Panel Not Printed – No Special Flood Hazard Areas”.
312
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE S-2
100-YEAR
FLOOD PLAIN
100-YR FLOOD PLAIN MAP
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
313
Amended Plat Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision – Preliminary Plat Application
December, 2013
16 - 1
Plat Supplement No. 16 – Parks and recreation facilities
16. Parks and recreation facilities.
The Amended Plat of Meadow Creek Subdivision (APMC) proposes to use the available parkland credits
associated with the dedicated parkland within Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision of which APMC is a
part and was allocated park land credits. APMC had an original park allocation by Meadow Creek Phase
1 Subdivision of 89 dwelling units or 2.67-acres of park. APMC proposes 42 dwelling units or 1.26-
acres, or a reduction of 1.41-acres of park.
Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision dedicated two park areas; Lerner Park and Ainsworth Park (see
Figure 16-1). Based on the final plat for Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision (Figures 16-2.1 & 16-2.2)
these parks have 11.809-acres of dedicated parkland credit. Both parks have been improved per the
Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April 19, 2006 (provided on attached compact disk), as documented by
the aerial images shown on Figures 16-3.1 & 16-3.2. DOWL HKM also inventoried actual built dwelling
units to planned (Figure 16-4) and found that new maximum density of Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision to be 365 units. This count was conservative for the count assumed any vacant lot would use
the maximum planned density, where the built lots have been consistently to a lower density.
Based on an inventoried maximum of 365 dwelling units for Meadow Creek Phase 1 Subdivision; 10.95-
acres of parkland is required. Per the Meadow Creek Phase 1 Final Plat 11.807-acres of dedicated park
was provided, allowing for an excess of 0.857-acres of parkland within Meadow Creek Phase 1
Subdivision.
a. Park plan. APMC proposes to follow the Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April 19, 2006.
b. Park maintenance. APMC proposes to join the existing Meadow Creek Home Owners
Association and pay appropriate prorate share for the maintenance of park and open space area.
c. Irrigation information. APMC proposes to follow the Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April
19, 2006.
d. Phasing. APMC proposes to follow the Meadow Creek Master Park Plan, April 19, 2006.
314
MEADOWCREEKPHASE1SUBDIVISIONBOUNDARYSITEAMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1A&1Bwww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834PARKAREAMAPFIGURE#16-1315
AMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1A&1Bwww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834LERNERPARKFIGURE#16-2.1316
AMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1A&1Bwww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834AINSWORTHPARKFIGURE#16-2.2317
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE #16-3.1LERNER PARK - EXIST. CONDITIONS
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
318
www.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834 FIGURE #16-3.2AINSWORTH PARK - EXIST. COND.
AMENDED PLAT
MEADOW CREEK SUBDIVISION
PHASE 1A & 1B
319
MEADOWCREEKPHASE1SUBDIVISIONBOUNDARY464431034313335427191522810735AMENDEDPLATMEADOWCREEKSUBDIVISIONPHASE1A&1Bwww.dowlhkm.com406-586-8834POPULATIONDENSITY-PARKAREAMAPFIGURE#16-4320