Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutH4 Knolls at Hillcrest " 4 t Commission Memorandum e REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Andrew Epple,Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager SUBJECT: The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat, #P-06028 MEETING DATE: Public hearing on Monday,July 24,2006, at 6:00 pm BACKGROUND: Property owners, Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, and applicant, PC Development, have submitted a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application to subdivide 31.56 acres into 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot, and 1 bed and breakfast lot. The subject property is annexed and has a zoning designation of R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) and R-O (Residential Office District), and is located south of the existing Aspen Point complex at 1201 Highland Boulevard. A variance has been requested from Section 18.44.101.A to allow that Josephine Lane not be constructed to the western property line. However, a public access easement would be provided to the western property line to allow access to the Burke tracts,if and when it is needed. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: The application indicated that the maximum building height for the single-household dwelling units would be 22 feet. However, the applicants would like to amend recommended condition #2 (page 2 of the Planning Board resolution) to limit building height for the single-household units to 26 feet. The applicants met on site with representatives of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. Based on the site visit, the RPAB members were comfortable with this request (see the attached RPAB memo dated July 11, 2006). Staff is supportive of this amendment to recommended condition #2. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this application be conditionally approved with the conditions listed on Pages 2-4 of Planning Board Resolution #P-06028, with the revision noted above in"Unresolved Issues." FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues,along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property,when the property is developed. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. CONTACT: Please feel free to email Jody Sanford at jsanford@bozeman.net if you have any questions prior to the public hearing. Respectfully submitted, Andrew Epple,Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager Report compiled on July 19,2006 Attachments: Planning Board Resolution #P-06028 July 5,2006 Planning Board Minutes Staff Report March 29,2006 letter to Todd Mitchell May 26,2006 RPAB memo June 13,2006 CAHAB memo July 11, 2006 RPAB memo Public comment (4) August 4, 1997 letter to Edmund Burke Applicant's submittal Report compiled on July 19, 2006 The Knolls at Hillcxest Major Subdivision I RESOLUTION #P-06028 ,4 � RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD REGARDING A MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION, WITH A VARIANCE REQUEST, TO SUBDIVIDE 31.56 ACRES INTO 78 SINGLE-HOUSEHOLD RESIDENTIAL LOTS,1 MULTIHOUSEHOLD RESIDENTIAL LOT,AND 1 BED AND BREAKFAST LOT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-3 (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT) AND R-O (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE DISTRICT), AND IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE SOUTH PORTION OF TRACT 1,COS 2047,LOCATED IN THE EAST HALF OF SECTION 18, T2S, R6E, PMM, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA, GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF HIGHLAND BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF THE EXISTING ASPEN POINT COMPLEX AT 1201 HIGHLAND BOULEVARD. 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, Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, and applicant, PC Development,submitted a Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application,with a variance request,to subdivide 31.56 acres into 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot,and 1 bed and breakfast lot, and the remaining area as parks, open spaces, streets and alleys, on property described as the south portion of Tract 1,COS 2047,located in the east half of Section 18,T2S,R6E, PMM, 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 18.04 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance;and WHEREAS,the City of Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on Wednesday,July 5, 2006, to review the application and any written public testimony on the request for said Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application;and WHEREAS, one member of the public provided testimony expressing concern about the extension of Kenyon Drive and the steepness of the street;and WHEREAS,one member of the public spoke and expressed concern regarding the extension of Kenyon Drive, and asked several question related to Highland Boulevard improvements, Ida Street right-of-way,plowing of Kenyon Drive,and plans to connect O'Connell Street to South Church Street; and 1 RE I IV, The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision WHEREAS, one member of the public spoke and expressed support for the proposed trail system, regretting the crossing of the trail by Kenyon Drive due to the impacts on skiing, and was supportive of the variance request;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 RESOLVED,that the City of Bozeman Planning Board,upon a vote of 8-0,recommends to the Bozeman City Commission that the application to subdivide 31.56 acres into 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot,and 1 bed and breakfast lot, and the remaining area as parks, open spaces, streets and alleys, on property described as the south portion of Tract 1,COS 2047,located in the east half of Section 18,T2S,R6E,PMM,Gallatin County, Montana,be conditionally approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat shall include a public access easement for all areas labeled as"public open space" and for all streets/alleys if they are not dedicated. 2. All single-household dwelling units will be limited to one story above grade (basements are acceptable). This will be specified in the covenants,restrictions,and articles of incorporation for the creation of a homeowners'association. 3. The final park plan shall indicate which amenities and landscaping the applicant will install. The applicant shall be responsible for installing the proposed public restroom, and the dedicated park parking spaces (including striping and signage),and the disabled accessible trail connecting the parking spaces to Burke Park. 4. A copy of the covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the creation of a homeowners' association shall be submitted with the final plat application for review and approval by the City. The following corrections shall be made to the draft covenants, restrictions and articles of incorporation: a. Section 7.5.1 specifies a 4'/2 foot tall fence,however Section 18.42.130 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance limits the height of fences to 4 feet in any required front yard or any portion of a required corner side yard that is forward of the rear edge of the building facade nearest the corner side yard. b. Section 3.17 allows for the temporary parking of recreational vehicles in a driveway or on the street. However, Section 18.38.03 of the UDO prohibits all parking of recreational vehicles except for in a garage or in the rear yard. d. In Section 3.17,the following phrase should be struck: "...but over-night parking on streets by guests is prohibited." d. Provisions for assessment, maintenance, repair and upkeep of the following must be provided,and all Sections for"Areas of Association Responsibility"need to specify that the following common areas will be maintained by the association as follows: i. All areas identified as open space on the final plat; 2 PRELI'V,11, I . The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision. ii. All private streets; iii. All sidewalks and boulevards in public rights-of-way along external subdivision streets and adjacent to parks and/or open spaces; iv. All trails in the development; V. Stormwater facilities,including retention/detention ponds; vi. The water booster system, back-up emergency power equipment, and the building in which these are housed (except for the interior of the public restroom); vii. Public parkland until a City-wide parks maintenance district is created;and viii. Any area provided for mail delivery within the development. e. Covenants shall contain information regarding the orientation for all corner lots. 5. Instead of paying cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication to the City,the applicant may pay cash-in- lieu of parkland dedication into an escrow account to be released upon dedication of the balance of the required parkland dedication in the proposed community park east of Highland Boulevard. 6. Should historical, cultural and/or archeological materials be inadvertently discovered during construction of this project,the State Historical Preservation Office(SHPO)and the Bozeman Historic Preservation Office shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease. 7. Should any species of concern, as defined by the Montana Natural Heritage Program, be discovered on-site during construction,the Montana Department of Fish,Wildlife and Parks and the Montana Natural Heritage Program shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease. 8. Water rights,or cash-in-lieu thereof,shall be provided and paid for prior to final plat approval. If the final plat of the subdivision is filed in phases,water rights will only be required for each phase as the final plat for that phase is filed. The amount of water rights required will be determined by the City Engineer based on the proposed final plat. 9. If the variance to not extend Josephine Lane to the western property line is granted by the City Commission, the public access easement shall still be extended to the western property line. 10. Highland Boulevard, including any required utility extensions, shall be constructed along the frontage of the subdivision including tapers meeting AASHTO requirements to transition back to the existing road width. There is no 4 lane minor arterial street section in the City's transportation plan. If the 3 lane option being proposed to the south does not have enough capacity for the section to the north,then a 5 lane section shall be installed. The required right of way dedication for Highland Boulevard is 100 feet. 11. All improvements necessary to provide adequate level of service at the analyzed intersections(all movements at all intersection) must be installed or financially guaranteed prior to filing of the plat. No building permits will be issued until all improvements required are installed and 3 . �The Knolls at Hillcxest Major Subdivision 4 accepted. Approval must be obtained from the Montana Department of Transportation of the TIS and for all improvements along Highland Boulevard. 12. The Old Highland Boulevard right of way must be vacated south of the Hillcrest Access road. 13. The isolated booster station water system zone shall not create any dead end mains longer than 500 feet in either the proposed or existing system. 14. The booster station shall be designed to provide the max day demand plus 1500 gpm fire flow with a residual pressure of 20 psi unless all of the units within the isolated zone are fire sprinkled. If fire sprinklers are utilized,the system shall provide the max day demand plus 500 gpm fire flow with a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi. 15. The proposed water mains shall be connected to the existing mains on the north and east. A normally closed valve shall be installed at the connection point. 16. Easements for any offsite drainage discharges must be provided. These easements can be temporary that will expire once the storm drains are extended with future development. A pavement design for 17. Highland Boulevard must be provided with the design reports for the project. 18. Street lighting must be provided along the section of Highland Boulevard that is being improved with this subdivision. 19. If a variance to not extend Josephine Lane to the western boundary of the subdivision is granted to the City Commission,it is recommended the following condition be part of the approval of the variance: 100 percent of the cost of construction of the improvements shall be placed in an escrow account prior to final plat approval to be used for completion of these improvements in the future. A copy of the executed documents shall be submitted with the final plat. If the lots/tracts are converted into park, or otherwise restricted in future use such that it is agreed between the City and the Developer that the extension to the street will not be required, then the escrow will be released to the developer. 20. Birchwood Lane shall be reconstructed to a City standard street. An easement will be required for the portion of the street outside the limits of the subdivision. Within the limits of the subdivision,either and easement will be required, or right of way dedicated. 21. Road geometry shall meet the criteria in the COB design standards unless a deviation is approved during the infrastructure design review. Some of the intersections do not meet the standards as shown. 22. A section of 4-inch PVC pipe shall be installed beneath Kenyon Drive, north of the existing trail,extending a minimum of 2 feet on either side,to provide for future irrigation extensions. 23. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Unified Development Ordinance. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval,does not,in any way,create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 4 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision � + DATED THIS DAY OF ,2006 Resolution#P-06028 Andrew C. Epple,Planning Director JP Pomnichowski,President Department of Planning&Community Development City of Bozeman Planning Board 5 MINUTES THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD COMMISSION MEETING ROOM, G`f CITY HALL, 411 EAST MAIN STREET WEDNESDAY, JULY 5, 2006 7:30 P.M. ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Planning Board President JP Pomnichowski called meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Planning Board Members Present Staff Members Present JP Pomnichowski Chris Saunders, Assistant Director,Planning and Dave Jarrett Community Development Erik Henyon Lynette Windemaker, Contract Planner Caren Roberty Jody Sanford, Senior Planner Edward Sypinski Kelly Marple,Recording Secretary Randy Carpenter Brian Caldwell Guests Present Clint Litle, HKM Engineering Jason Leep, PC Development Ted Lang, Gallatin Valley Land Trust Peg Potter,Resident, City of Bozeman Dave Parker,Resident, City of Bozeman ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} President Pomnichowski stated that the meeting would begin with a public comment period for any items not on the agenda and asked for any public to come forward at this time. There was no public comment. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF MAY 16th,JUNE 6TH,AND JUNE 20TH, 2006 President Pomnichowski amended the agenda to read June 20th instead of June 16th and asked for any corrections or additions to the minutes of June 20th, 2006. No corrections were presented;minutes of June 20th will stand as written. President Pomnichowski then asked for any corrections or additions to the minutes of June 6th,no changes were offered, June 6th minutes will stand as written. President Pomnichowski then asked for any corrections or additions to the minutes of May 16th, Edward Sypinski requested that the minutes of May 16th describe himself, Steve Kirchhoff, and Caren Roberty as present at the meeting and not include Nicholas Lieb who is Zoning Commission only. The minutes were approved as corrected. ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW P LIA I NA[i Major Subdivision Prel. Plat Application #P-06025—(West Winds, Phase III). A jor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application requested by the property owner and applicant, Cascade Development, Inc. and represented by HKM Engineering Inc., to allow the subdivision of 12.368 acres into 10 single household lots and 2 multi-household lots within the West Winds Planned Community. This property is legally described as NW 1/4 , Section 2, T2S, R5E, P.M.M. Gallatin County, Montana. (Windemaker) Contract Planner Lanette Windemaker presented the staff report and went over the phases which have approval. She stated that the only condition she would like to point out is meeting the 10%RSL requirement on this property, and she pointed out that the applicant had originally showed single household lots only, and they need to look at multi-family for Lots 1 and 2, and that the lots need to be designated R4. President JP Pomnichowski then asked if there were questions for staff at this time. Brian Caldwell asked Ms. Windemaker to explain what a Third Party Builder was as referenced in Condition 12. Ms. Windemaker clarified that it basically meant builders that are not under control of John Dunlap and Cascade Developments, anyone that is not under the developer's control. Dave Jarrett asked Ms. Windemaker why it was necessary to put a restriction on a Third Party Builder, to which she explained that there was a problem with concurrent construction during Phase One which had escalated into something that was very uncomfortable for a lot of people, and that the DRC had asked for this condition and the developers were agreeable. Ms. Windemaker further elucidated by saying that this condition was strictly on concurrent construction,which means only while construction is going on and before all of the infrastructure is installed. President Pomnichowski then asked if there were any further questions, hearing none she asked the applicant to please step forward. Clint Litle with HKM Engineering stepped forward and stated that the DRC had been over the applications and applicant comfortable with recommended conditions including the concurrent construction and the affordable housing on the large parcels. President JP Pomnichowski then asked for questions of applicant at this time, hearing none, she then asked if there were any members of the public present who would like to make public comment on this application. Hearing none, Ms. Pomnichowski returned discussion to the board. MOTION: President JP Pomnichowski entertained a motion at this time, Dave Jarrett recommended approval of Application#P-06025 with conditions, Steve Kirchhoff seconded the motion. The motion to approve Application#P-06025 passed unanimously(seven in favor,none opposed). Major Subdivision Prel. Plat Application#P-06028—(The Knolls at Hillcrest). A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application requested by the property owner,Bozeman Deaconness Health Services,represented by PC Development, to allow the subdivision of 31.56 acres into 78 single household lots, 1 multi-household lot, and 1 bed and breakfast lot. This property is legally described as South Portion of Tract 1, COS 2047.E1/2 Sec. 18,T.2S, R.6E, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Sanford) Senior Planner Jody Sanford went over the details of the application and showed location of the development on the concept plan. She added that the applicant is requesting a variance in conjunction with this application not to construct a street to Josephine Lane to the westernmost property line because it is unclear if and when future properties would be constructed and that building a dead-end street did not make sense to the applicant. She stated that staff is recommending approval subject to the 17 conditions listed in staff report, and that she believes the applicant is in agreement with staff conditions. President JP Pomnichowski asked if there was a need for required frontage for Lots 15-38. Jody explained that the way the code is written is in the code requirements, and is not in the conditions. Ms. Pomnichowski then stated that it was written in the staff report that block lengths were not to exceed 400 feet in length, but that some of them do exceed that length, and would they need a relaxation for that. Ms. Sanford stated that they won't have to request relaxation because they will be able to meet conditions in their final plats. Dave Jarrett's questioned Ms. Windemaker on what property the extension of Josephine Lane bounces into, Jody described the Burke property. Dave Jarrett went on to say that 60 or so people don't want Kenyon to be open, and asked who owns the property to the south where Kenyon will go into. Planner Jody Sanford said that it is dedicated public right of way, and that Ken LeClair owns the east side and Westland Enterprises owns the other. Dave Jarrett expressed a dislike for the set up because the only access to a series of the lots is through an alley. JP Pomnichowski asked for further questions of staff, hearing none she asked for the applicant to please come forward. Jason Leep with PC Development then came forward and stated that they were entirely in line with density and land use, and that proposed lot sizes had already been discussed. Mr. Leep then showed the set up of this development, gave some of the demographics of the residents who would be living here, and stated that all development is under control of Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, including assisted and individual living facilities. He went on to say that it is age- restricted and will be limited to residents aged 55 and older, and that even though this is a typical subdivision—it is geared toward retirement aged people,therefore will need more pedestrian-type facilities. Mr. Leep then stated that they prefer not to build the Josephine extension, and that the engineering department has put on a condition that if they don't build it,they still have to pay for it, which they don't want to do. It was determined that Mr. Leep was talking about condition number 19 on page 16. He went on to say that they would like to stop the road at the back of the lots, and are also asking that the condition to guarantee the construction of it in the future be removed. Mr. Leep then stated that regarding the building height restrictions, they are committed to one story structures,but because of the possibility of lofts being built over garages,they are proposing 28 feet from alley or street to the top of the roof. He stated that walk-out basement type lots will be built where the topography calls for it. In regards to the Kenyon extension,they prefer it would not be there, and would like an alternative access to be considered. He recommended that a different type of emergency vehicle access is granted in through another way,rather than putting in a full public street. Mr. Leep said that they want to use a rollover curb so that curb cuts are not as complicated, and because they want to ensure that maintenance can be immediate, especially snow removal. Dave Jarrett questioned the address usage, and if they would have to use alley addresses. Mr. Leep answered that they will use Josephine Lane addresses, and that the alleys are 30 foot with 20 foot of pavement, and outside of the 30 foot right of way there is a 20 foot setback to the garage, so there will be two parking spaces in addition to garage spaces. Mr. Leep stated that there will be a street number out front and one on the garage if needed. Dave Jarrett then asked if there is an easement across the trail at Josephine,Mr. Leep stated that he did not know. Dave Jarrett then expressed a liking for the subdivision,but thinks Mr. Leep should build Kenyon to the property line. Caren Roberty observed that the apartments above the garages may need to go 28 feet in height,but the drawings presented show 22 feet heights. Mr. Leep then presented pictures taken from Christie Fields which showed the location where this development and stated that they have analyzed the view of this development. He went on to say that they have studied the architecture and the lofts areas will just be additional living/floor space and the buildings will still appear to be one story. Mr. Leep added that they are building in the rafters rather than switch the building height because `one-story' is kind of a vague reference. Steve Kirchhoff asked if the DRC has had an opportunity to comment on the six foot difference in building height,to which Mr. Leep answered that they had not,but that he does not foresee any problem with the height change. JP Pomnichowski asked about Section 10 of the application and if the applicant was going to make improvements at Highland and Main Street. Mr. Leep answered that they were planning on making improvements, and that there is a sufficient right of way to add a left turn lane. President Pomnichowski made the observation that she likes it that they are planning 31-foot alleys, and she likes where they moved the Bed&Breakfast. JP Pomnichowski asked if the view from a couple of the lots would be other lots,to which Mr. Leep answered yes, but that they are analyzing the density and may end up dropping two or four lots so that this does not happen. Mr. Leep then presented a board which showed a true scale profile of trails and ridgelines, he stated that it was 54 feet from trail to property line, there is 20 feet of setback line, and that the houses are 140 feet from trail. He added that between the trail and houses there will be a black metal fence which is an effective dog barrier without being a vision blocker. JP Pomnichowski then OPENED THE MEETING TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC. Ted Lange with Gallatin Valley Land Trust, 2807 Westridge Drive began by saying that he likes the design and the plan,but does not want the trail cut at Kenyon and asked if the applicant would look at a way to make this project work without trail cutting. Mr. Lange said that he has been in communication with the Burke family and that they structured it so that they could build there,but they have stated that they do not want to build there so they are actively working to come up with other alternatives such as a land swap because it would be terrible for the trail system. President JP Pomnichowski asked for any other public speakers. Peg Potter of 1715 Kenyon Drive stated that she was at the meeting on her own and also on behalf of the members of the neighborhood she lives in who have signed a petition—which is part of the package which board members should have received. They are not opposed to Deaconess development and think it is good for the community. In regards to the extension of Kenyon Drive,they are concerned because they live there and know what the roads are like not only on Kenyon,but also coming off of Highland onto Kenyon, the turn from Highland onto Lomas, and Baxter. They find that this danger is personified on Kenyon and can be quite dangerous especially in winter. Ms. Potter stated that Kenyon Drive was built over 20 years ago and she would like to know if Kenyon meets current-day standards. She stated that she would advocate some type of breakaway gate and was told that the reason for the extension was safety. Ms. Potter then asked if it is connecting just for the sake of connectivity and because the 2020 plan calls for it. Ms. Potter ended her statement by stating that when Highland continues to be built up over the next few years, Kenyon will be used as a shortcut and she and her neighborhood would appreciate considerations that other alternatives be considered on Kenyon Drive. President Pomnichowski asked for further comment from the public. Dave Parker of 1716 Kenyon IrJELI p, It & i Drive asked what changes to Highland Boulevard were planned besides a left turn lane. President Pomnichowski stated that questions will be taken after public comment is made. Mr. Parker pointed out that the steep part of Kenyon as it exists now is facing south/southwest and gets the maximum sun and melts first in winter,but the slope where the cul-de-sac is now facing due north, the road is very slick and difficult in winter. Mr. Parker asked how far up Kenyon is the applicant planning to plow and if anything will be done with Oconnell. He stated that this development was originally supposed to be visually appealing,but with the road and traffic going through, it was not visually appealing in his view. Mr. Parker pointed out that the Mayor had said to not mess with a community or an area that is working, and if you can't help it, then don't hinder it. Mr. Parker then ended his statement by saying that many persons in this neighborhood do not support Kenyon going through and he would appreciate the board's consideration. President JP Pomnichowski asked if anyone else would like to speak to this application,hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING and returned discussion to the board. She then asked staff to please address the questions asked by the public. Jody Sanford stated that she would answer the trail easement question on the Burke tract,there is a trail easement,but they are not perpetual, they are retractable. Planner Sanford said that in regards to the question about Kenyon Drive meeting engineering specifications, the condition that Kenyon Drive connect was an engineering condition, so based on that she assumes that the condition does meet city standards. Dave Jarrett asked Planner Sanford if the lots that were depicted on the Burke property come all the way down to South Church,to which Jody answered no they do not. Mr. Jarrett remarked that they would then be land-locked. Chris Saunders said the lots were planned for a flat area by planners who do not know the area, and that this area is hilly, that's why it wouldn't work. Mr. Leep then addressed the question regarding other proposed changes to Highland and stated that Highland will be widened to three lanes,will have a center turn lane, will have five lanes for commercial uses, and the three lane section will go to Kagy. JP Pomnichowski asked Planner Jody Sanford about the zoning and stated that lots 2 through 7 show that the zoning is BP and not R3,to which Jody answered that it was a mapping error which has since been corrected. President JP Pomnichowski returned discussion to the board asked if there were any general comments at this time,or if board members would like to address the conditions. None were offered. MOTION: Erik Henyon made a motion to strike Condition 2 and have it read a building height restriction of 28 feet. Dave Jarrett seconded the motion. JP Pomnichowski asked for discussion on the motion. JP Pomnichowski said it gave her pause because all the review done by all of the different bodies thus far has been done with the consideration of a 22 foot height, and without Parks and Recreation's consideration of the trails, she does not support the motion. Randy Carpenter proposed that they only discuss the lots impacting the view shed. Edward Sypinski agreed that schematics have shown 22 feet thus far,therefore the applicant should stick to the 22-foot height restriction. PR va . 'ti Caren Roberty would like Parks and Recreation or somebody look at it because they haven't seen anything that shows what the view will be like from below. Steve Kirchhoff asked what the topographical difference is and Mr. Leep showed him plans depicting the topography. Dave Jarrett stated that he agrees with Randy Carpenter that a variation in heights is important and asked the applicant if they had considered this in their plans. Brian Caldwell stated that Place Architecture is doing the designs of all of the buildings, and they do quality work wherever they go,therefore they should be allowed flexibility in the design process. JP Pomnichowski asked for further discussion on the motion. Hearing none, President Pomnichowski asked for a vote. Brian Caldwell,Dave Jarrett, and Eric Henyon voted yes on the motion; Carol Roberty,Randy Carpenter, Steve Kirchhoff, JP Pomnichowski and Edward Sypinski were opposed. The motion did not pass with a 3 to 5 vote. Brian Caldwell brought up the issue of applicant's request for a variance not to build the extension,to which Planner Jody Sanford stated that instead of building a street which may be potentially to nowhere,the city is allowing the applicant to put the money for the street in an escrow account, and if they don't get variance,they must build the street or financially guarantee it for the future. President Pomnichowski stated that all of the improvements for future access within this parcel are the applicant's to do, and she added the applicant must show a hardship to be granted a variance. Planner Sanford said that if the applicant gets the variance, they won't build it the whole way,just to comfort station. JP Pomnichowski asked how far the distance is that the applicant does not want to build, to which Mr. Leep answered 70 feet. Planner Sanford stated that the staff report and the subdivision review committee recommend the granting of the variance because the street dead-ending into the park is not a good idea. JP Pomnichowski asked if anyone had a motion, none was offered. Caren Roberty said that the plan in the book does not meet fair housing standards, and violates both federal and state fair housing, and if applicant wants to meet with her regarding this, she will explain. Randy Carpenter asked if variance meets economical hardship, and asked staff to elaborate on their definition of hardship. Chris Saunders responded by saying that they had swiped the criteria right off of a statute—if granting the variance puts cost on the public,then variance is weighed, but not if private party is impacted. President Pomnichowski expressed a liking for several of the changes the applicant had made. She then strongly encouraged applicant to drop interior lots 19 and 28, 14 and 20. President Pomnichowski also stated that the private open space with public easement drives her crazy because eight months of the year it will be a snowfield and she would like to see it remain a public park. She added that she thinks the plan is much improved,the alleys are a great width, and she agrees with all other conditions recommended by staff. President Pomnichowski then asked for further comment. Chris Saunders stated that regarding 22 versus 28 feet, it sounds like there is a uniform agreement that a number in height should be reached, a set number rather than the one story language. Erik Henyon agreed with Mr. Saunders. JP Pomnichowski asked for further comment. MOTION: Steve Kirchhoff moved for approval of Major Subdivision The Knolls at Hillcrest with the conditions as outlined by staff,Dave Jarrett seconded the motion. JP Pomnichowski asked for discussion on the motion. Steve Kirchhoff said that he thinks this is an improved plan and should move forward. Randy Carpenter thinks the plan is much improved and will be a great neighborhood,but is not sure why they want a private park, he thinks it is one step away from a gated community and is concerned that they are setting a bad precedent. Dave Jarrett stated that he likes the whole plan, but does not care for the inside plan of access and identification because it will be difficult to find addresses,he stated that he would vote to recommend approval. Erik Henyon is in support of the application,would like to see some mixed architecture, and thinks the 28 feet restriction would accomplish that. Brian Caldwell said that he would like to see the applicant's designs because just talking about the designs was difficult. Caren Roberty would like to have an assurance that not all buildings will end up 28 feet in height. President Pomnichowski said that they can send a comment to the commission. President Pomnichowski then asked for further discussion on the motion,hearing none, the motion to approve Major Subdivision The Knolls at Hillcrest passed unanimously,with eight votes in favor and none opposed. President Pomnichowski thanked the applicant. Steve Kirchhoff asked to make a supplemental statement that it is difficult to talk about this until we see a lot-by-lot plan. Planner Jody Sanford responded that she will do a city commission memo highlighting his request. Minor Subdivision Pre-Application#P-06029—(Farmhouse Partners). A Minor Subdivision Pre-Application requested by the property owner and applicant, Farmhouse Partners, represented by Engineering Inc., to allow the subdivision of 11.53 acres into 3 multi-household lots. This property is legally described as Tract 4A of Minor Subdivision No. 162C records of the Clerk and Recorder, Gallatin County,Montana. (Krueger) Staff Planner Brian Krueger went over the pre-application location and said that the two uses proposed are a cottage style development and proposed future use would be Gallatin Mental Health. Planner Krueger said that applicant is looking at developing a small campus in the area, and where it shows there are possible parking issues, the applicant showed some reciprocal parking. Planner Krueger went on to say that in regards to frontage improvement, engineering is proposing that they improve the south part of Haggerty. JP Pomnichowski asked for questions of staff. Hearing no questions of staff, President Pomnichowski asked the applicant to please come forward. Tom Eastwood with Engineering Incorporated stepped forward and asked if there were any questions of him at this time. Steve Kirchhoff said that his questions about infrastructure would include access. Tom Eastwood answered that they are making sure there is not a detrimental impact on traffic. Dave Jarrett asked if there are going to be accesses to the adjoining properties; he would like to see those. JP Pomnichowski asked for questions for the applicant. Erik Henyon said that staff recommended a variance for the distance to intersections, and asked which major intersection are they talking about, and if this is this a major intersection that you would need a spacing setback for. Tom Eastwood answered that it meant the major intersection or arterial near this project, and Planner Brian Krueger said that this is this done for traffic flow and stated that the commission did not want extremely wide streets. JP Pomnichowski asked for further questions of the applicant. Hearing none, President Pomnichowski OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. Hearing none,President Ll�j� PLANNING BOARD & CITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT THE KNOLLS AT HILLCREST MAJOR SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT FILE NO. #P-06028 Item: Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-06028, with a variance, to subdivide 31.56 acres, located west of Highland Boulevard and south of the existing Aspen Point complex at 1201 Highland Boulevard, into 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot and 1 bed and breakfast lot, and the remaining area as parks, open spaces, streets and alleys. Property Owner: Bozeman Deaconess Health Services 915 Highland Boulevard Bozeman MT 59715 Representative: PC Development 3985 Valley Commons Drive Bozeman, MT 59718 Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Wednesday, July 5, 2006 at 7:00 PM and before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, July 24, 2006 at 6:00 PM, both in the City Commission Meeting Room, City Hall, 411 East Main Street, Bozeman, Montana Report By: Jody Sanford, Senior Planner Recommendation: Conditional Approval PROJECT LOCATION The subject property is located west of Highland Boulevard and south of the existing Aspen Point complex at 1201 Highland Boulevard, and is legally described as the south portion of Tract 1, COS 2047, located in the east half of Section 18,T2S, R6E, PMNl, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is annexed with a zoning designation of R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) and R-O (Residential Office District). Please refer to the vicinity map on Page 2. #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 1 Property IR-1 R U Rill PROPOSAL A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application with a variance has been submitted that would allow 31.56 acres,located west of Highland Boulevard and south of the existing Aspen Point complex at 1201 Highland Boulevard, to be subdivided into 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot and 1 bed and breakfast lot, and the remaining area as parks, open spaces, streets and alleys. Access to the subdivision will be provided by two street connections to Highland Boulevard (a minor arterial), two street connections to Birchwood Lane which is a proposed new local street, and by connection to Kenyon Street which is an existing local street. The majority of the parkland is proposed as a linear park along the south edge of the proposed development, with the remainder being provided as cash-in-lieu until the large community park proposed to the east is dedicated. A variance has been requested from Section 18.44.10LA to allow that Josephine Lane not be constructed to the eastern property line. If the variance is not approved by the City Commission, the Engineering Department would require that the street be constructed to the property line or financially guaranteed until it is constructed. ZONING DESIGNATION &LAND USES The subject property is currently vacant,and as previously noted is annexed with zoning designations of R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) and R-O (Residential Office 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. The intent of the R-O (Residential Office) district is to provide for and encourage the development of multi-household and apartment development and compatible professional offices and businesses that would blend well with adjacent land uses. The primary use of a lot, as measured by building area, permitted in the R-O district is determined by the underlying growth policy land use designation. Where the district lies over a residential growth policy designation the primary use shall be non-office uses;where the district lies over a #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 2 non-residential designation the primary use shall be office and other non-residential uses. Primary use shall be measured by percentage of building floor area. The following land uses are adjacent to the subject property: North: Existing Hillcrest complex (including Aspen Pointe and Birchwood), zoned R-O; South: Single-household and condominium residential uses,Josephine Park; zoned R-1 (Residential Single- Household,Low Density District); East: Agricultural uses;zoned R-1 (Residential Single-Household,Low Density District); and West: Burke Park and vacant land;zoned R-1 (Residential Single-Household,Low Density District). The intent of the R-1 (Residential Single-household,Low Density) district is to provide for single-household residential development and related uses within the City at urban densities, and to provide for such community facilities and services as will serve the area's residents while respecting the residential character and quality of the area. GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION The subject property has a Residential designation on the Future Land Use Map in the City's growth policy (Bozeman 2020 Community Plan). This designation is described as follows: Residential. This category designates places where the primary activity is urban density living quarters. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such as parks, low intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools. The residential designation also 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. It is expected that areas of higher density housing would be likely to be located in proximity to commercial centers to facilitate the broadest range of feasible transportation options for the greatest number of individuals and support businesses within commercial centers. Low density areas should have an average minimum density of six units per net acre. Medium density areas should have an average minimum density of twelve units per net acre. High density areas should have an average minimum density of eighteen units per net acre. A variety of housing types should be blended to achieve the desired density with large areas of single type housing being discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints and natural features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a lower density than normally expected within this classification. All residential housing should be arranged with consideration given to the existing character of adjacent development,any natural constraints such as steep slopes,and in a fashion which advances the overall goals of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The residential designation is intended to provide the principal locations for additional housing within the Planning Area. The following growth policy designations are adjacent to the subject property: North: Existing Hillcrest complex (including Aspen Pointe and Birchwood), designated Residential; South: Single-household and condominium residential uses, Josephine Park; designated Residential and Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 3 East: Agricultural uses;designated Residential;and West: Burke Park and vacant land; designated Residential and Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands The Parks, Open Space and Recreational Lands designation is described as: All publicly owned recreational lands, including parks, fall within this category, as well as certain private lands. These areas are generally open in character and may or may not be developed for active recreational purposes. PRELIMINARY PLAT SUPPLEMENTS A subdivision pre-application for this project was reviewed by the Development Review Committee on February 22, 2006, the Planning Board on March 7, 2006, and the City Commission on March 13, 2006. During the preapplication review, the following waivers were granted from Section 18.78.060, Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements: ® 18.78.060.A, Surface Water ® 18.78.060.F,Wildlife ® 18.78.060.B,Floodplains ® 18.78.060.H,Agriculture ® 18.78.060.C, Groundwater ® 18.78.060.I,Agricultural Water User Facilities ® 18.78.060.E,Vegetation ® 18.78.060.N,Educational Facilities The following supplemental items were not waived and have been provided as part of this preliminary plat application: 18.78.060.1) Geology, Soils and Slopes The subject property does not contain any geologic hazards or any unusual soil, topographic or geologic conditions. However, the site contains slopes. The applicants provided a geotechnical investigation report, soils maps and reports from the Natural Resource Conservation Service, and an exhibit showing planned cuts and fills in excess of 3 feet. This information is provided in Section 11. 18.78.060.G Historical Features The applicant sent a letter to the State Historical Preservation Office requesting a cultural resource file search. A copy of SHPO's response is included in Section 12. 18.78.060.J Water and Sewer Preliminary engineering design reports were provided that demonstrate that adequate water distribution systems and capacity, and sewage collection and disposal systems and capacity, exist to serve the proposed subdivision.These reports can be found in Sections 10A and 10B. 18.78.060.K Stormwater Management Stormwater management is also addressed with a preliminary engineering design report in Section 10C. 18.78.060.L Streets, Roads and Alleys Highland Boulevard (a principal arterial) is directly adjacent to the subject property. This proposal includes two connections to Highland Boulevard. Four new local streets are proposed—Birchwood Lane, Pilot Knob Road,Knolls Lane and Josephine Lane. An existing local street— Kenyon Drive— #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 4 will be extended into the development. The existing paved path along Highland Boulevard will be retained. The applicants are proposing several new trails. A preliminary engineering design report for transportation improvements is provided in Section 10D. 18.78.060.M Utilities The applicants have included letters from Bresnan Communications, Northwestern Energy and Qwest. See Section 7. 18.78.060.0 Land Use This proposal includes 78 single-household residential lots, 1 multi-household residential lot and 1 bed and breakfast lot. The multi-household residential lot is also planned to contain a clubhouse. The property is designated as Residential in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Fifteen restricted size lots are proposed. The RSL lots will contain detached single-household units that are indistinguishable from the non-RSL lots. The proposal was reviewed by the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board with no recommended revisions. 18.78.060.P Parks and Recreation Facilities The preliminary Park Plan is provided in Section 15. For parkland dedication, 3.6264 acres would be required for this development. The applicants are proposing to dedicate 2.51 acres as a linear park along the south edge of the property. The remaining 1.1164 acres will be provided as cash-in- lieu of parkland dedication. The linear park system will include landscaping, trails, free play areas and a restroom facility near Burke Park. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board reviewed the application and were supportive of the proposal. 18.78.060.Q Neighborhood Center Plan The subject property is included in the adopted Bozeman Deaconess Health Services Plan. As part of that adopted plan, the neighborhood center for the neighborhood is proposed east of Highland Boulevard. Therefore, no neighborhood center plan was provided with this application. The applicants have been put on notice that later phases will need to provide a neighborhood center that complies with the City's neighborhood center requirements. 18.78.060.R Lighting Plan The most up-to-date lighting plan is provided in Section 16. Street lights are proposed for the intersections of local streets with bollards at trail intersections. 18.78.060.S Miscellaneous This subdivision will impact access to Burke and Josephine Parks which are existing City parks. The applicants are proposing enhanced trail access to both City parks. In addition, the applicants will provide 5 off-street parking spaces for Burke Park, including disabled accessible parking. No identified hazards exist on the subject property. STAFF FINDINGS/REVIEW CRITERIA The basis for the City Commission's decision to approve, conditionally approve or disapprove the subdivision shall be whether the preliminary plat, public hearing if required, Planning Board advice and recommendation, and additional information demonstrate that development of the subdivision complies #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 5 with this title, the City's growth policy, the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and other adopted state and local ordinances, including, but not limited to, applicable zoning requirements. The Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, Section 76-3-608, establishes the following primary review criteria for the governing body to consider when evaluating subdivisions. Planning Staff, the DRC, and other reviewing agencies have made comments in relation to those and other criteria as described below, and have recommended conditions as outlined at the end of this staff report. A. Primary Review Criteria 1. Effects on Agriculture The property is annexed, and has been zoned and master planned for Residential development for many years. 2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities No effects on agricultural water user facilities were identified. 3. Effects on Local Services Water/Sewer. Water and sewer main extensions will be required to serve this development. Therefore, the standard code requirements apply, including the requirements for plans and specifications, detailed design reports, and engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings applies. No building permits will be issued prior substantial completion and City acceptance of required water and sewer infrastructure improvements. The Engineering Department recommended a condition requiring that the proposed new water mains connect to existing water mains on the north and east, with normally closed valves installed at the connection points. There is very little water pressure in the area including the subject property. As such, the applicants are proposing to install a booster station to ensure adequate water pressure. The Engineering Department has recommended some conditions specific to the proposed booster station to ensure proper operation and integration into the City water system. The City needs to acquire water rights to keep up with the growing demand for municipal water service. Therefore, water rights or cash-in-lieu thereof must be obtained with this development unless already paid with annexation. Police/Fire. The property is well within the City's Police and Fire emergency response area. The subdivider must obtain addresses for the new lots from the City Engineering Division prior to filing of the final plat to facilitate fire and police response to the site. The applicants provided letters from the Bozeman Fire Department and American Medical Response. Both letters indicate that the service provider could provide adequate service to this proposed development. A site for a new fire station was reserved east of Highland Boulevard as part of the adopted Bozeman Deaconess Health Services Subarea Plan. Streets. Many street improvements will be required for this development. Therefore, the standard code requirements apply, including the requirements for plans and specifications, #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 6 detailed design reports, and engineering services for construction inspection, post- construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings applies. No building permits will be issued prior substantial completion and City acceptance of required street infrastructure improvements (with the exception of sidewalks). The Planning and Engineering Departments have recommended many conditions to ensure that the street improvements installed with this development will adequately address the traffic and transportation impacts being created by this development. These include recommended conditions 9-12 and 17-21. The streets and alleys are proposed to be private, but with public access easements. A recommended condition requires that the final plat show public access easements for all proposed private streets and alleys. 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. The proposal shows stormwater being discharged off site. The Engineering Department recommends a condition for the provision of appropriate easements for this off site discharge. Parks/Trail. For parkland dedication, 3.6264 acres would be required for this development. The applicants are proposing to dedicate 2.51 acres as a linear park along the south edge of the property. The remaining 1.1164 acres will be provided as cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication. Planning staff has recommended a condition allowing that the cash-in-lieu funds be placed in an escrow account to be released if and when dedicated parkland is provided in the community park proposed east of Highland Boulevard. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board (RPAB) was supportive of this recommended condition. The linear park system will include landscaping, trails, free play areas and a restroom facility near Burke Park. Planning staff has recommended a condition requiring that the final park plan indicate which amenities will be installed by the developer, and that the developer be responsible for installing the proposed restroom,parking spaces and disabled accessible trail. RPAB was supportive of this recommended condition RPAB reviewed the application and were supportive of the proposal. They found that the design was in keeping with the "Condition 21 Development Guidelines" agreed to in June of 2004. The visual impacts of buildings upon Burke Park were of great concern to RPAB, and the developers have indicated that all single-household residential units will be one story structures. As such, Planning staff has recommended a condition limiting the single- household homes to one story above grade. Utilities. There are existing power, cable and phone utilities in the vicinity. The preliminary plat shows 10-foot utility easements being provided along the fronts of the lots. Letters from the applicable utility companies were provided indicating that service can be provided to this new development. 4. Effects on the Natural Environment As required, a noxious weed management and revegetation plan was provided with the preliminary plat application (see Section 17). A Memorandum of Understanding must be #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 7 entered into with the County Weed Board prior to submittal of the final plat. As required, the applicants provided geotechnical and soils information (see Section 11). The applicants also provided ridgeline schematics at the request of the RPAB (see Section 14). These materials indicated minimal impacts on the natural environment. Any minor impacts will largely be mitigated with compliance with code requirements and recommended conditions. Finally, the applicants provided a letter from the State Historic Preservation Office regarding cultural resources on the subject property. The letter from SHPO indicates that there is a low likelihood that cultural properties will be impacted. Staff is recommending a condition requiring that should historical, cultural and/or archeological materials be inadvertently discovered during construction of this project, the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Bozeman Historic Preservation Office shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease 5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat The applicants provided a letter from Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks indicating that no impacts to fisheries or aquatic habitats had been identified. Staff is recommending a condition that should any species of concern, as defined by the Montana Natural Heritage Program, be discovered on-site during construction, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the Montana Natural Heritage Program shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease. 6. Effects on Public Health and Safety The intent of the regulations in the Unified Development Ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision has been reviewed and determined to be in general compliance with the title. Any other conditions deemed necessary to ensure compliance have been noted throughout this staff report. B. Compliance with the survey requirements provided for in Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. The property in question has been surveyed and platted in conformance with the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and filed as a preliminary plat in accordance with the state statute and the Bozeman Municipal Code. C. Compliance with the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance. The following requirements are standards of the Unified Development Ordinance and shall be addressed with the final plat submittal: 1. Per Section 18.06.040.D.R, a complete final plat application shall be submitted to the Planning Department within two calendar years of the date the Findings of Fact and Order are signed. 2. Per Section 18.12.040, the Certificate Accepting Cash Donation in Lieu of Land Dedication must be on the final plat if cash-in-lieu will be provided. 3. Per Section 18.12.060, the Certificate of Completion of Improvements must be included on the final plat. #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 8 4. Per Section 18.16.020,apartments and apartment buildings are not allowed in the R-3 zoning district. The large lot proposed for condominiums currently contains both R-O and R-3 zoning. If apartment buildings (more than a fourplex) are contemplated, the R-3 zoning will need to be changed. Development of the bed and breakfast lot will be subject to a conditional use permit review, and development of the multihousehold lot will be subject to site plan review. 5. Per Section 18.38.060.B, compliance with this section will be required if zero sideyard setbacks will be used in this development. The legal written agreement allowing zero sideyard setbacks shall be submitted with the final plat application for review and approval by the City. The agreement shall be filed with the final plat. 6. Per Section 18.42.030.13, 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 final plat shall be accompanied by an exhibit indicating the orientation of all corner lots. 7. Per Section 18.42.030.I, all lots must have frontage in compliance with Section 18.44.090.B. Proposed Lots 15 through 38 do not comply with this requirement because the "private open space"is not proposed to have a public access easement. 8. Per Section 18.42.040.B, block lengths are not to exceed 400 feet. The following block lengths exceed 400 feet: Lots 1-8, Block 1; Lots 9-15 Block 1; Lots 5-12, Block 2; and Lots 1-7,Block 5. 9. Per Section 18.42.050, 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. 10. Per Section 18.42.120, if mail will not be 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. It shall not be the responsibility of the City to maintain or plan any mail delivery area constructed within a City right-of-way. 11. Per Section 18.42.130.B, fences located in the rear or side yard setbacks of properties adjoining any linear park shall have a maximum height of 4 feet. 12. Per Section 18.42.150, street lighting is only required at the intersections of local streets. Lights will be required at 225 foot intervals along Highland Boulevard, including the intersections with local streets. Per Section 18.78.060.R, a revised and complete lighting plan shall be submitted and approved prior to installation of street improvements. 13. Section 18.48.070 requires the subdivider to install irrigation, sod and street trees on all external streets and adjacent to public parks or other open spaces. A landscape plan shall be submitted, identifying the location and tree species to be installed by the developer, prior to installation of the trees or by final plat,whichever comes first. 14. Per Section 18.50.020, 3.6264 acres of parkland dedication will be required with this subdivision. As many as 0.6432 acres of additional parkland may be required when the multi-household lot is developed. Dedicated parkland of 2.51 acres will be provided with this plat. The remaining 1.1164 acres shall be provided as cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication. #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 9 15. Per Section 18.50.090, 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. 16. All improvements are subject to Chapter 18.74 "Improvements and Guarantees." 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. 17. The final plat must be in compliance with all requirements of Section 18.78.070 "Final Plat," including,but not limited to the following items: a. Section 18.78.070.0 states that a Memorandum of Understanding shall be entered into by the Weed Control District and the subdivider for the control of county declared noxious weeds and a copy provided to the Planning Department prior to final plat approval. b. The final plat submittal shall include all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates. The final plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies on a double-sided, high density 3'/z-inch floppy disk or compact disk;and five (5) paper prints. C. Final Park Plan. For all land used to meet parkland dedication requirements, a final park plan shall be submitted to the City of Bozeman for review and approval prior to final plat.The installation of any park improvements to meet minimum development standards or conditions of approval shall comply with Chapter 18.74, BMC. The final park plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City Commission, with a recommendation from the Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. The final park plan shall include all of the information listed in §18.78.060.P of this chapter. d. Irrigation System As-Builts. The developer shall provided irrigation system as-builts, for all irrigation installed in public rights-of-way and/or land used to meet parkland dedication requirements, once the irrigation system is installed. The as-builts shall include the exact locations and type of lines, including accurate depth, water source, heads, electric valves,quick couplers, drains and control box. 18. 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 basin location, show location of 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 site, drainage ways and finished lot grades), typical stormwater detention/retention basin and discharge structure details, basin sizing calculations and a stormwater maintenance plan. Any stormwater ponds located within a park or open space shall be designed and constructed to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 10 open space. Stormwater ponds for runoff generated by the subdivision (e.g., general lot runoff, public or private streets, common open space, parks, etc.) shall not be located on easements within privately owned lots. While the runoff from the individual lots will be dependent on the intensity of use on each lot, the maximum sizing of the storm retention facilities for each lot will be established based on maximum site development. Final facility sizing may be reviewed and reduced during design review of the FSP for each lot. 19. Plans and specifications and a detailed design report for water and sewer main extensions, storm sewer and the public street, prepared by a Professional Engineer, shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer and 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 pre-construction conference has been conducted. No building permits shall be issued prior to substantial completion and City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements. 20. All infrastructure improvements including 1) water and sewer main extensions, and 2) public streets, curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting parks, open space, rear yard frontages or other non- lot frontages, and related storm drainage infrastructure improvements shall be financially guaranteed or constructed prior to final plat approval. City standard residential sidewalks shall be constructed on all public street frontages of a property prior to occupancy of any structure on the property. 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. This condition shall be included on the final plat for the subdivision. 21. The location of existing water and sewer mains shall be properly depicted. Proposed main extensions shall be noted as proposed. 22. The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, NRCS, 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 FSP approval. 23. Easements for the water and sewer main extensions shall be a minimum of 30 feet in width, with the utility located in the center of the easement. In no case shall the utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of easement. 24. The developer shall make arrangements with the City Engineer's office to provide addresses for all individual lots in the subdivision prior to filing of the final plat. 25. The applicant shall submit a construction route map dictating how materials and heavy equipment will travel to and from the site in accordance with section 18.74.020.A.1 of the Unified Development Ordinance. This shall be submitted as part of the final site plan for site developments, or with the infrastructure plans for subdivisions. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the construction traffic follows the approved routes. 26. All construction activities shall comply with section 18.74.020.A.2. of the Unified Development Ordinance. This shall include routine cleaning/sweeping of material that is dragged to adjacent streets. The City may require a guarantee as allowed for under this #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 11 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. D. Compliance with the required subdivision review process. A subdivision preapplication was submitted on January 24, 2006. The preapplication was reviewed by the DRC on February 8, 15 and 22, 2006. The preapplication was reviewed by the Bozeman Planning Board on March 7, 2006 and by the City Commission on March 13, 2006. The final preapplication letter was mailed on March 29, 2006. The applicant had until March 29, 2007 to submit a preliminary plat application. A preliminary plat application was submitted on May 16, 2006 and the required completeness letter was sent on May 18, 2006. The preliminary plat was reviewed by the DRC on May 31, 2006 and June 7 and 14, 2006. The required adequacy letter was mailed on June 22, 2006. On the third and final week of DRC review, a favorable recommendation was forwarded for consideration by the Planning Board and City Commission. Public notice for this application was placed in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday,June 18, 2006. The site was posted with a public notice on June 16, 2006. Finally, notice was sent to adjacent property owners via certified mail, and to property owners of record within 200 feet of the subject property via first class mail, on June 16,2006. On June 28, 2006 the subdivision staff report was drafted and forwarded with a recommendation of conditional approval to the Planning Board for consideration at its July 5,2006 public hearing. The City Commission will make a final decision at a July 24, 2006 public hearing. A final decision for a major subdivision must be made within 60 working days of the date it was deemed complete or in this case by May 16, 2006. If the application is approved on July 24, 2006 then it will have taken 44 working days. E. Provision of easements for the location and installation of any planned utilities. There are existing power, cable and phone utilities in the vicinity. The preliminary plat shows 10- foot utility easements being provided along the fronts of the lots. Letters from the applicable utility companies were provided indicating that service can be provided to this new development. F. Provision of legal and physical access to each parcel. The proposed lots will gain access from frontage on internal local streets or alleys. The streets and alleys are proposed to be private with public access easements. 18.66.070 SUBDIVISION VARIANCES A variance has been requested from Section 18.44.101.A to allow that Josephine Lane not be constructed to the eastern property line. Per Section 76-3-506, MCA, a variance to the UDO must be based on specific variance criteria, and may not have the effect of nullifying the intent and purpose of this title. The City Commission shall not approve subdivision variances unless it makes findings based upon the evidence presented in each specific case that the following review criteria are adequately addressed. #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 12 1. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or be injurious to other adjoining properties. The granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare, or be injurious to other adjoining properties. The municipal code requires that streets be extended to adjacent undeveloped land to facilitate the orderly development of adjacent, undeveloped properties. In this case,Josephine Lane would be extended to the west property line to allow for the development of parcels owned by Edmund, Martha and Thomas Burke. At this time, it is unclear if and when these tracts will ever be developed. The extension of a dead-end street, that is never used to actually serve development,would negatively impact the park experience enjoyed by Burke Park users. Planning staff recommends a condition requiring that a public access easement be provided to the western property line even if the street is not constructed. This would allow the Burkes to construct an access to their property should such an access be required. 2. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if strict interpretation of this title is enforced. The subject property's proximity to Burke Park makes the extension of Josephine Lane to the western property line undesirable at this time. The existence of an unused dead-end street would be detrimental to the park experience enjoyed by Burke Park users and detrimental to this proposed residential neighborhood. 3. The variance will not cause a substantial increase in public costs. This variance will not result in public costs. If this variance is granted, the costs associated with extending Josephine Lane to the western property line, if and when this is needed, would be borne by the Burke family. 4. The variance will not, in any manner, place the subdivision in nonconformance with any other provisions of this title or with the City's growth policy. This variance will not create any other nonconformity. Access will still be provided to the Burke tracts via a public access easement. The variance would simply allow the applicant to not construct the street all the way to the property line. PUBLIC COMMENT Three letters have been provided to the Planning Department. One letter, which was accompanied by a petition signed by 60+ residents of the adjacent neighborhood to the south, expressed opposition to the extension of Kenyon Drive. The second letter also expressed opposition to the extension of Kenyon Drive. The final letter was from the Gallatin Valley Land Trust. GVLT's comments expressed support for the proposed subdivision design, for the proposed park plan and for limiting residences to single story buildings. Any public comments received after the date of this report will be distributed at the public hearing. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The recommended conditions of approval do not include code requirements identified in the staff findings. Mandatory compliance with the explicit terms of the Unified Development Ordinance does not constitute conditions of approval. The conditions of approval may require compliance with more than the minimum standards in order to conform to the physical and economic development of the City, and to the safety and #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 13 general welfare of the future lot owners and of the community at large. The applicant must comply with all provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code,which are applicable to this project. The Development Review Committee finds that the Preliminary Plat application, with conditions, is in general compliance with the adopted growth policy, the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and the Unified Development Ordinance. The Planning Board may provide advice and comments on the following recommended conditions of approval: 1. The final plat shall include a public access easement for all areas labeled as "public open space" and for all streets/alleys if they are not dedicated. 2. All single-household dwelling units will be limited to one story above grade (basements are acceptable). This will be specified in the covenants,restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the creation of a homeowners'association. 3. The final park plan shall indicate which amenities and landscaping the applicant will install. The applicant shall be responsible for installing the proposed public restroom, and the dedicated park parking spaces (including striping and signage), and the disabled accessible trail connecting the parking spaces to Burke Park. 4. A copy of the covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the creation of a homeowners' association shall be submitted with the final plat application for review and approval by the City. The following corrections shall be made to the draft covenants, restrictions and articles of incorporation: a. Section 7.5.1 specifies a 41/2 foot tall fence, however Section 18.42.130 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance limits the height of fences to 4 feet in any required front yard or any portion of a required corner side yard that is forward of the rear edge of the building facade nearest the corner side yard. b. Section 3.17 allows for the temporary parking of recreational vehicles in a driveway or on the street. However, Section 18.38.03 of the UDO prohibits all parking of recreational vehicles except for in a garage or in the rear yard. d. In Section 3.17, the following phrase should be struck: "...but over-night parking on streets by guests is prohibited." d. Provisions for assessment, maintenance, repair and upkeep of the following must be provided, and all Sections for "Areas of Association Responsibility" need to specify that the following common areas will be maintained by the association as follows: i. All areas identified as open space on the final plat; ii. All private streets; iii. All sidewalks and boulevards in public rights-of-way along external subdivision streets and adjacent to parks and/or open spaces; iv. All trails in the development; V. Stormwater facilities,including retention/detention ponds; vi. The water booster system, back-up emergency power equipment, and the building in which these are housed (except for the interior of the public restroom); vii. Public parkland until a City-wide parks maintenance district is created;and #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 14 viii. Any area provided for mail delivery within the development. e. Covenants shall contain information regarding the orientation for all corner lots. 5. Instead of paying cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication to the City, the applicant may pay cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication into an escrow account to be released upon dedication of the balance of the required parkland dedication in the proposed community park east of Highland Boulevard. 6. Should historical, cultural and/or archeological materials be inadvertently discovered during construction of this project, the State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) and the Bozeman Historic Preservation Office shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease. 7. Should any species of concern, as defined by the Montana Natural Heritage Ptograrn, be discovered on-site during construction, the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks and the Montana Natural Heritage Program shall be contacted immediately and construction activities shall cease. 8. Water rights, or cash-in-lieu thereof, shall be provided and paid for prior to final plat approval. If the final plat of the subdivision is filed in phases,water rights will only be required for each phase as the final plat for that phase is filed. The amount of water rights requited will be determined by the Director of Public Service based on the proposed final plat. 9. If the variance to not extend Josephine Lane to the western property line is granted by the City Commission,the public access easement shall still be extended to the western property line. 10. Highland Boulevard, including any requited utility extensions, shall be constructed along the frontage of the subdivision including tapers meeting AASHTO requirements to transition back to the existing road width. There is no 4 lane minor arterial street section in the City's transportation plan. If the 3 lane option being proposed to the south does not have enough capacity for the section to the north, then a 5 lane section shall be installed. The requited right of way dedication for Highland Boulevard is 100 feet. 11. All improvements necessary to provide adequate level of service at the analyzed intersections (all movements at all intersection) must be installed or financially guaranteed prior to filing of the plat. No building permits will be issued until all improvements required are installed and accepted. Approval must be obtained from the Montana Department of Transportation of the TIS and for all improvements along Highland Boulevard. 12. The Old Highland Boulevard right of way must be vacated south of the Hillcrest Access road. 13. The isolated booster station water system zone shall not create any dead end mains longer than 500 feet in either the proposed or existing system. 14. The booster station shall be designed to provide the max day demand plus 1500 gpm fire flow with a residual pressure of 20 psi unless all of the units within the isolated zone are fire sprinkled. If fire sprinklers ate utilized, the system shall provide the max day demand plus 500 gpm fire flow with a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi. 15. The proposed water mains shall be connected to the existing mains on the north and east. A normally closed valve shall be installed at the connection point. 16. Easements for any offsite drainage discharges must be provided. These easements can be temporary that will expire once the storm drains are extended with future development.A pavement design for 17. Highland Boulevard must be provided with the design reports for the project. #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 15 18. Street lighting must be provided along the section of Highland Boulevard that is being improved with this subdivision. 19. If a variance to not extend Josephine Lane to the western boundary of the subdivision is granted to the City Commission, it is recommended the following condition be part of the approval of the variance: 100 percent of the cost of construction of the improvements shall be placed in an escrow account prior to final plat approval to be used for completion of these improvements in the future. A copy of the executed documents shall be submitted with the final plat. If the lots/tracts are converted into park, or otherwise restricted in future use such that it is agreed between the City and the Developer that the extension to the street will not be required, then the escrow will be released to the developer. 20. Birchwood Lane shall be reconstructed to a City standard street. An easement will be required for the portion of the street outside the limits of the subdivision. Within the limits of the subdivision, either and easement will be required, or right of way dedicated. 21. Road geometry shall meet the criteria in the COB design standards unless a deviation is approved during the infrastructure design review. Some of the intersections do not meet the standards as shown. 22. A section of 4-inch PVC pipe shall be installed beneath Kenyon Drive, north of the existing trail, extending a minimum of 2 feet on either side, to provide for future irrigation extensions. 23. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Unified Development Ordinance. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D of the Unified Development Ordinance, the Planning Board shall review the preliminary plat and supplementary information to determine if the proposed plat is in compliance or noncompliance with the adopted Growth Policy. The Planning Board shall act to recommend approval, conditional approval or denial of the preliminary plat application. The Board shall then provide advice and comments to the Bozeman City Commission for its consideration at its Monday, July 24, 2006 hearing which begins at 6:00 PM. The Planning Board Resolution #P-06028 and minutes from the Planning Board's meeting will be forwarded to the City Commission and made a part of the Commission's record. AS AN APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR SUBDIVISION, THE PLANNING BOARD WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION. THE CITY COMMISSION SHALL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ON THIS APPLICATION. THE DECISION OF THE CITY COMMISSION MAY BE APPEALED BY AN AGGRIEVED PERSON AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 18.66 OF THE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE. Attachments: March 29,2006 letter to Todd Mitchell Public comment (4) May 26,2006 RPAB memo August 4, 1997 letter to Edmund Burke June 13,2006 CAHAB memo Applicant's submittal July 11, 2006 RPAB memo Mailed to: PC Development, 3985 Valley Commons Drive,Bozeman, MT 59718 Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, 915 Highland Blvd,Bozeman, MT 59715 #P-06028 The Knolls at Hillcrest Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Staff Report 16 CITY OF BOZEMAN i DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building phone 406-582-2260 !„ 20 East Olive Street fax 406-582-2263 P.O. Box 1230 planning@bozeman.net Bozeman, Montana 59771-1230 www.bozeman.net March 29, 2006 Todd Mitchell PC Development 3985 Valley Commons Drive Bozeman,MT 59718 RE: HILLCREST WEST MAJOR SUBDIVISION PREAPPLICATION #P-06005 Dear Mr. Mitchell: The Bozeman Development Review Committee, Planning Board and City Commission have reviewed the above-reference preapplication for a major subdivision to create 78 single-household lots, 1 multi-household lot and 1 bed and breakfast lot. The summary comments presented below should be considered when you prepare your preliminary plat and application for review. CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS 1. Kenyon Drive should be extended through to this proposed subdivision to provide secondary, and emergency access. 2. Prepare a model/analysis of the ridgeline as viewed from Kagy Blvd and Willson Ave, and other prominent locations in the City,and submit with the preliminary plat application. 3. The developer must provide access to the adjacent tracts owned by the Burke family. 4. The City Commission may investigate hiring an impartial traffic engineer to review the traffic plans and studies submitted in association with this development. 5. The City Commission seemed supportive of providing access to Josephine Park, and providing some parking, restrooms and other amenities. 6. The private open space and/or private streets need to have public access. 7. The City Commission seemed supportive of consolidating parkland dedication in the larger community park to the east,with the provision of cash-in-lieu. PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS 1. A majority of the Planning Board members present supported connecting Kenyon Drive; the remaining Board members did not express an opinion or were neutral on the issue. 2. Board members expressed concern regarding the dedication of a large community park east of Highland Blvd and whether the City could afford to maintain such a large park. The Board planning • zoning • subdivision review . annexation • historic preservation • housing • grant administration • neighborhood coordination discussed whether the large park should instead be maintained by the homeowner's association, or perhaps a private-public partnership. 3. There was no consensus from the Board regarding placing the western-most street adjacent to Burke Park. Two Board members supported the concept and two members were opposed; the remaining Board members in attendance did not express an opinion on the issue. 4. Several Board members were concerned about the proposal for the streets to be private with public access easements;they felt that the streets should be public streets. 5. The majority of the Board members stated that this development needs a neighborhood park. The neighborhood park should be centrally located; the two small neighborhood parks depicted should be consolidated into a larger and more usable space. 6. Several Board members discussed the need to provide access to Josephine and Burke Parks, including parking and restroom facilities. 7. Several Board members expressed an interest in having the whole development shifted to the east to provide a greater buffer along Burke Park. 8. The Board President was supportive of the bed and breakfast concept, but felt that the B&B should be placed along Highland Blvd. DRC COMMENTS Project-Specific Comments: 1. The DRC granted the following waivers for the Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements outlined in Section 18.78.060 of the UDO. ® 17.78.060.A,Surface Water ® 17.78.060.F,Wildlife ® 17.78.060.B,Floodplains ® 17.78.060.11,Agriculture ® 17.78.060.C, Groundwater ® 17.78.060.I,Agricultural Water User Facilities ® 17.78.060.E,Vegetation ® 17.78.060.N,Educational Facilities The following requested waiver was not granted by the DRC: ❑ 17.78.060.D, Geology - With the preliminary plat, the applicant shall provide a soils report to the Building Division recommending types of foundations. Also, identify slopes in excess of 15 percent grade. All required supplements that are not waived by the DRC must be submitted with the preliminary plat application. 2. The shape of proposed Lots 6 and 36 is a little odd. Planning staff would recommend squaring up these lots with harder corners on Hillcrest West Dr. If the shape of these lots is retained on the preliminary plat,please show a building envelope,including the size of the envelope, for these lots. 3. Planning staff would prefer to see a more gridded subdivision design. 4. The western-most street that runs north to south should be adjacent to Burke Park instead of having lots adjacent to Burke Park. This would provide much needed access and public on-street parking. Some on-street parking spaces could be striped and signed for disabled accessible parking. 5. Based on the proposed land uses, 2.93 acres of parkland dedication would be required. If parkland will not be dedicated in this subdivision, and the parkland requirement will instead be met with an off-site dedication in the large community park proposed for east of Highland Blvd, cash-in-lieu shall be placed into an escrow account and released once the off-site dedication is made. Page 2 6. Since this development will be adjacent to public lands on the west and south, the covenants and design guidelines should contain language requiring fences and landscaping of the boundary between lots and public lands. The fences should be uniform in height, style, color and materials. 7. The southern trail connection should be moved to line up with the center of Josephine Park (between Lots 21 and 22). 8. The Neighborhood Park can be used to satisfy the neighborhood center requirement. However, the parks should be consolidated into one more usable space. If these will not be dedicated parkland, please re-label them as private open space. 9. Typical sections for the streets should be provided with the preliminary plat application. Any streets that do not meet the minimum city standards will be required to be privately owned and maintained. 10. A traffic impact analysis will be required for the project. 11. The preliminary plat application should include a preliminary stormwater plan. 12. No direct access will be allowed onto Highland from the lots adjacent to it. 13. Road geometry should meet the criteria in the COB design standards unless a deviation can be justified. Some of the intersections do not meet the standards as shown. 14. The west half of Highland Lane will need to be constructed along the frontage of the subdivision. The total right of way dedication required for Highland is 100'. 15. To provide good street connectivity and emergency/secondary access, Kenyon Drive will be required to be connected to this subdivision. 16. The typical section for the existing driveway to Hillcrest on the north side of the project must be provided with the preliminary plat for evaluation as to the suitability for use as a street. At a minimum, a public street easement will need to be provided. Additionally, widening of this facility may be required. 17. The water system pressure is very low here. All requirements of DEQ and the COB design standards regarding minimum system pressure, and fire flow must be met. 18. Radiuses to accommodate turning movements will be required at all intersections in the alleys. 19. The Fire Department has concerns with lots fronting only a park and an alley (i.e., no frontage on a street) due to addressing and emergency response. 20. If the old Highland Blvd right-of-way exists on the subject property,it will need to be vacated prior to submittal of a final plat application. Code Requirements: The preliminary plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Unified Development Ordinance. 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 deviation or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. The following requirements are standards of the Unified Development Ordinance and shall be addressed with the preliminary plat application: 1. Proposed Lots 1 through 16 may contain identified ridgeline protection areas as identified on the Bozeman Ridgeline Map. Per Section 18.42.110, all buildings located within ridgeline protection areas must be set back from the ridgeline a distance not less than 3 times its height above grade. The distance of the setback shall be measured perpendicular from the ridgeline. Please ensure that the lots are large enough to provide an adequate building envelope. Page 3 2. Per Section 18.42.020, a neighborhood center must be provided. Generally, neighborhood centers must be at least 1 acre in size and have streets along at least 75 percent,but not less than 50 percent, of the perimeter. 3. Per Section 18.42.030.D, 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. 4. Per Section 18.42.040.B, block lengths are not to exceed 400 feet. All of the block lengths of the external lots, except for the lots along Highland Blvd, exceed the 400 feet limit. Additional trail connections or streets should be installed to break up the blocks. 5. Per Section 18.42.040.C, block widths cannot exceed 400 feet. The large block in the center of the subdivision slightly exceeds the 400 foot limit. 6. Per Section 18.42.050, 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. 7. Utility easements shall be provided in accordance with Section 18.42.060. The required 10-foot front yard easement is required for all lots unless written confirmation is submitted with the preliminary plat from ALL utility companies providing service indicating that front yard easements are not needed. 8. Section 18.44.010.A states: When a proposed development adjoins undeveloped land, and access to the undeveloped land would reasonably pass through the new development, streets within the proposed development shall be arranged to allow the suitable development of the adjoining undeveloped land. Streets within the proposed development shall be constructed to the boundary lines of the tract to be developed, unless prevented by topography or other physical conditions, in which case a subdivision variance must be approved by the City Commission. This proposal should provide access to the undeveloped Burke tracts to the west. 9. Section 18.50.050 requires that park land have frontage along 100 percent of its perimeter on public or private streets or roads. 10. 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 that was already with the annexation. 11. Section 18.78.040 requires that ground contours for the property be provided with the preliminary plat. 12. Section 18.78.050.1-1 requires that any noxious weeds be identified and mapped by a person with experience in weed management and knowledgeable in weed identification. A noxious weed management and revegetation plan, approved by the County Weed Control District, shall be submitted with the preliminary plat. 13. Section 18.78.060.F requires that the Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks review the proposed subdivision. Written documentation must be submitted with the preliminary plat that verifies that FWP has reviewed the proposed plat, lists any FWP recommendations, and outlines any mitigation planned to overcome any adverse impacts. 14. Section 18.78.060.G requires that the State Historic Preservation Office review the proposed subdivision. Written documentation must be submitted with the preliminary plat that verifies that SHPO has reviewed the proposed plat; lists any SHPO recommendations; outlines any plans for inventory, study and/or preservation;and describes any mitigation planned to overcome any adverse impacts. Page 4 15. Section 18.78.060.M requires that the preliminary plat application be accompanied by a written statement from all relevant utility companies indicating that service can be provided. 16. A draft copy of the covenants, restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the creation of a homeowners' association shall be submitted with the preliminary plat application for review and approval by the Planning Department and shall contain, but not be limited to, provisions for assessment, maintenance, repair and upkeep of private streets, common open space areas, public parkland/open space corridors, stormwater facilities, public trails, snow removal, and other areas common to the association pursuant to Chapter 18.72 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance. 17. A complete preliminary plat application shall be submitted to the Planning Department within one calendar year of the date the Planning Department dates, signs and places preapplication comments in the outgoing mail. While the City has tried to identify all issues and concerns during preapplication review, additional comments will likely be identified during the preliminary plat review. Please contact me if you have any questions. Respectfully, Jody Sanford,AICP Senior Planner JS/iS cc: Cheryl Ridgely,Bozeman Deaconess Health Services,915 Highland Blvd,Bozeman, MT 59715 Page 5 Bozeman Recreation & Parks Advisory Board V P.O. Box 1230 • Bozeman, MT - 59771 Subdivision Review PLANNER: Jody Sanford FROM: Subdivision Review Committee SUBJECT: Knolls at Hillcrest MEETING DATE: 5/26/06 COMMENTS: • It is our opinion that the backyards of the houses along the West side of the development, with 4' fence and landscaping provide a better buffer for Burke Park than Kenyon Ave. street frontage. The sight—line analysis provided and on site exploration leads us to agree that the proposal is in keeping with the"Condition 21 Development Guidelines" agreed to in June of 2004. • The linear park and access to Josephine Park are noteworthy features • The South-West corner park with comfort station and ADA parking and access to the trail will be a welcome feature to Burke Park and trail users. RECOMMENDATION: • 1.1 acres short of parkland, developer to provide cash-in-lieu,the amount to be held in escrow against future parkland to be provided in development East of Highland. Recommend that the amount of cash-in-lieu be sufficient so as not to provide a disincentive for future parkland dedication. • It is unclear who will be responsible for building and maintaining the comfort station. We recommend that the developer build and the city maintain. • We recommend that the city approve the proposed plan, subject to agreeing on the cash-in-lieu escrow details and construction/maintenance responsibility. From: Caren Roberty [croberty@hrdc9.org] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 4:05 PM To: Jody Sanford Subject: Knolls at Hillcrest -Portion of the Hospital Project Jodi: I was not sure whom the planner is so please forward as needed. Excerpts from the CAHAB Minutes on Knolls at Hillcrest ❑The CAHAB reviewed the preliminary plat for Hospital/Knolls at Hillcrest, an age restricted community where at least one of the occupants of the units had to be over age 55. The project designated 26 bungalow lots as RSL's. The lots were single family detached, 5,000 square feet, and bordered by a section of parkland. The CAHAB discussed options for affordability, however; given the location of this portion of the Hospital Project, adjacent to Burke Park trail,the most popular park in Bozeman, they did not see a mechanism under the current UDO regulations to produce any affordable units. Susie Gallaher made a motion to recommend that the City Commission accept the Knolls at Hillcrest sub-division. The motion was seconded by Mary Martin and subsequently passed.❑ Caren Roberty, Community Development Director HRDC 32 South Tracy Bozeman, MT 59715 406-585-4866 croberty@hrdc9.org Bozeman Recreation & Parks Advisory Board P.O. Box 1230 • Bozeman, MT • 59771 Subdivision Review PLANNER: Jody Sanford FROM: Subdivision Review Committee SUBJECT: Knolls at Hillcrest MEETING DATE: July 11, 2006 COMMENTS: • Jason Leep of PC Development led an onsite inspection/evaluation of the impact of the proposed height limit increase at Knolls at Hillcrest. 26' stakes were moved along the setback boundary while we traveled along the Burke Park Trails to observe the effects on the sightlines. A 22' mark was on the stake so we were able to compare the difference. • Jason suggested that the increase would give the architects more freedom to vary the heights of the buildings. • From the easternmost trail in the Burke Park Trail System, the increase would have a noticeable effect on the views of Bozeman Pass. From the Ridgeline Trail (just to the west)the views are unchanged,i.e. while the increased height would have a negative impact on some stretches of one trail, spectacular 360'views are still unimpeded on the upper trail. • At worst, some views of the Bridger foothills are blocked,but views of the "M" and Baldy are still unobstructed. • As we proceeded north on the trail we perceived that the buildings would primarily block views of existing buildings. RECOMMENDATION: • In our opinion, the negative impacts of such an increase in height limits are small and would be more than offset by a more visually pleasing variation in roofline heights. We recommend that the commission approve the requested increase with the stipulation that the developer pays special attention to an attractive variation in building heights. Citing the Condition 21 Development Guidelines, June 2004 [page 5, section B]: "Future development of the lands in tracts 1 &2 will be designed to take into account the view shed of those using Burke Park and associated perimeter trails. The architectural design will be designed to incorporate the architectural beauty of the surrounding area." FISCAL EFFECTS: • n/a ALTERNATIVES: • Holding PC Development to the originally agreed 22' limit would prevent some view impairment from sections of the Burke Park Trails,but the result would be a more solid and foreboding frontage to the Park. Respectfully submitted, Sandy Dodge, Chairman, RPAB Report compiled on July 11, 2006 Jody Sanford,AICP June 2, 2006 Senior Planner City of Bozeman o 20 East Olive Street �� FtiT � P.O. Box 1230 �N/�yoFp Bozeman,MT 59771-1230 ° tip jsanford e bozeman.net Re: Petition Against Kenyon Drive hammerhead and possible throughway to Bozeman Deaconess/Hillcrest Subdivision. Dear Ms. Sanford, Attach is a petition, signed by over sixty local residents,asking that Kenyon Drive not be put through to the new Hillcrest Subdivision. The petition shows that objections to the Kenyon Drive connection are not only from those on Kenyon,but also from the entire community Kenyon Drive draws from/empties into. Everyone sees negative effects from the street connection. Damages will be to established community,peace,home value, and safety. Please review your plans carefully to try and find a more neighborhood friendly solution that can meet with the fire departments concerns. Don't turn our neighborhood into a commuting thoroughfare that may also cause more street accidents(due to our blind corner and hill)and provide multiple night access/egress points for curiosity seekers, pranksters and criminal activity. Please forward our letter(with attached petitions)to each of the City Commissioners well in advance of future discussions of the Hillcrest Subdivision and Kenyon Drive. . Local residents and neighbors __............. cc: City Commissioners: Steve Kirchoff,Karen Jacobson,Jeff Krause(Mayor),Jeff Rupp, Sean Becker.P.O.Box 1230,Bozeman,MT 59771 PC Development Group Attachment: Copy of Signed Petition Against Kenyon Drive connection to Hillcrest Subdivision Petition of Locai Residents Against Any Th,,jughway of Kenyon Drive to the new Bozeman Deaconess Hospital Hillcrest West Subdivision Resident Name Print Resident Signature Address Phone /s 2 Ta.+ 4e. Z�6�, Iq/I 5A)e7�- �j)je As- -7--WZz 3 pr, 5 6 8 9 VIZ -7 101 V, 77Y/1--2 12 �k 03 5 C4 13 . �To C4 L AsA.,�ew �e_ T8 I ePTD C. 14 _�5*h 15 '00' +1 17 4 Ilog CO Z4 le,� - 18 ',P M 570 - 61to 19 Am rz A51, Z/ 0, LEV. 5$7.72-21 20 roe, Maslc4 /03® gek6V Z)e-. 6,7 7- Y's 21 2 I�krrA V 10,30 B Dr 5-70- 22 S) 641 -4169 23 24 1pAe fjgr,,�y /2/L— 53f ry-17 25 ZOO/S T / ,O( 6 P, fw V 26 CSIV S 49 27 28 29 30 31 MY Ke^,YLi-\ 50- 2o �.3 AV ■ Address • Phone ® • i i 1722- mmpi• r R , 0 • ,4 Y • / -� ® mow WA,1111 m WINfv r # r m - t ,U, Gallatin Valley an Trust �v 6/5/06 TO: Jody Sanford,Associate Planner JON 0 6 oFp� 2aQs FROM: Ted Lange,GVLT Community Trails Program aV�COU, ti O pj�YN SUBJECT: Knolls at Hillcrest Preliminary Plat Application Located adjacent to one of Bozeman's most heavily used and unique parks,this development must be carefully designed to ensure that the park's aesthetic and recreational values are not compromised. GVLT believes the proposed design accomplishes this goal while adding amenities that will benefit Burke Park. We support the following elements of the proposed plan: • The proposed green space,backyards,fencing and landscaping on the west and south sides of the development will provide a good buffer for Burke Park and the trail corridor connecting to Highland. We strongly prefer this design over the alternative of routing Kenyon along the eastern edge of the park. • Limiting all residences to single-story structures will minimize the visual impact on the park. • In the southwest corner of the development,the proposed park with comfort station, ADA parking and ADA trail access will be a significant new amenity for Burke Park users. • The design provides a good connection to Josephine Park Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, T d Lang ,GV.__, Staff P.O."Box 7021 ■ Bozeman,Montana 59771-7021 ■ 406-587-8404 ■ Fax 406-582-1136 ■ www.gvlt.org recycled paper June 12, 2006 Dear Sean, I am writing in reference to the Hillcrest West Development submitted by PC Development for the Bozeman Deaconess Foundation. I have concerns as to how it may affect my neighborhood off Highland Boulevard on Kenyon Drive. My husband and I as well as our neighbors and friends have been told that the extension of our street is"a done deal", as in already been decided that it will connect on through, n spite of the fact that there has not even been a preliminary plat hearing yet. If this is the case, I guess there is no need to read on. If not the case,then I hope you will considerate the following information and our perspective, as I speak not only for myself, but also for many of my neighbors. I have been told that the reasons for extending Kenyon include: 1) fire protection and public safety, 2)that the 2020 Plan or UDO says all roads must connect and no cul-de- sacs allowed in any future developments, and 3)that the 2020 Plan or UDO says all parks and open space need to have public access along and through to insure that everyone can easily access them. I have not personally verified these 3 items,but I assume that it probably says this or something like this in some document somewhere,being used as a basis to take a wonderful small neighborhood and potentially make it less desirable on the basis of some perceived greater good. I would like to address each of these 3 items, starting with number 1. In regards to safety, I would ask that you take some time from your busy schedule to drive up to our neighborhood. Start at Highland and turn west on Lomas, Take a quick right (north) on Chambers then a quick left (west) on Baxter. Notice the steep,blind turn as you head up Baxter. Do you really think this road was ever meant to be a through(collector) street? Now continue up around the curve to the north and at O'Connell, turn left(west), head up the short hill to Kenyon on your right,turn and stop. Please read the sign. I have attached a copy,just in case you do not get up there. It says "Road Closed Except Local Property Owners 8:00 PM- 6:00 AM By Order of Dir. (Director I assume) of Public Safety City of Bozeman." I suspect that making this a"Through Street"will not suddenly make it a"safe" street that should be open at all times. If anything it will be less safe and here is why. Continue to proceed up Kenyon and notice the very steep grade and blind curve at the top of the hill. See reference photo included in case you don't make the drive yourself. Now imagine, children on foot or bicycles up around the corner, along(in)the street,heading up to get to the trail. Why in the street? There are no sidewalks. Is there room for them? Well we were not required by the city to put them in a few years ago when everyone else was, so I don't think so. Or maybe it is because the land falls away to the west? Or the grade that those sidewalks would need to be at going up the hill? Do you honestly think we will be"more safe"if this street now had through traffic going up and down? Have you ever been up or down this street when it snows or is icy? Do you really think that this road was built and designed with the intention to become a through street? I have had to help push cars up this hill and I have watched unsavvy drivers (not my neighbors) go down the hill too fast and slide right into Tad Weaver's mailbox at the bottom of the hill and take it out! Yet we are told we will be"safer"with this road extended, a road never engineered in the first place to handle any degree of traffic. In regards to item number 2, everything connects,no cul-de-sacs, I ask why? Are we not allowed to be part of a neighborhood with its own unique identity and character? Must we all now be part of some big continuum? Why would our"wise"city planners, appointed and elected officials theoretically want to degrade a charming small neighborhood by forcing it to connect to some new neighborhood in the name of connectivity and safety? I find it ironic that when I ask people if they would rather live on a cul-de-sac or on a through street they ALWAYS say on a cul-de-sac. No one has yet answered"through street". Yet our UDO has taken away our right to create new cul-de-sac, in essence taking away our right to live the way we want to live. What is that all about? Safety? I would sincerely hope that you would think long and hard about this and change the UDO in this regard. I also have been told that an easement was granted by Bozeman Deaconess Foundation back in 1987 as part of a requirement of platting a minor subdivision,making it possible for the proposed 5 lot subdivision on Kenyon Drive (by Ken LeClair who already has 4 lots), along with a hammerhead cul-de-sac on the other side of the trail in the hospital field to the north. My understanding is the decision to act on his proposal was continued until after the Hillcrest West project was through preliminary plat approval, as it was the city's intention not to grant the cul-de-sac,but rather just extend the road on through, Again, it sounds like public comment was never even intended to be considered if this is true. And even though, at this time,I am not writing in reference specifically to that development,but because it is related to this one, I shall comment on the LeClair project. My comments are these. Why does he get to have 5 lots instead of 4? It just decreases safety on our street. I realize the city built the access road to the water tower in the wrong place,but it could be torn out and rebuilt, or the 4 lots could be reconfigured and LeClair would still have room for his detention pond and he could build a driveway to his last lot off the cul-de-sac. The existing cul-de-sac could be extended and improved to meet fire truck turn radius and be done without crossing the trail. And as far as access to the Burke Family lots to the west of the trail and currently running through their lots,that access could easily be provided through the Bozeman Deaconess Foundation land without Kenyon Drive having to be extended across the trail. A parking lot could be provided off the hospital land for access to the park,helping to alleviate excess traffic on Kenyon. Or what about Josephine Park with access to it from the hospital land? I was told LeClair was allowed to put Highwood Estates in to the east of the park without having to grant a future access easement to/along Josephine Park. Is that fair and just? My point is there are other alternatives; it would be nice if someone was interested in helping us and looking into these other solutions and helping us to preserve our unique and special neighborhood. We do not want to see the quality of our existing neighborhood sacrificed, degraded or devalued at the expense of a new neighborhood. The new neighborhood could deal with all the issues from their land without having to impact our street,which was never designed with the intention of handling the comings and goings of a larger neighborhood? It would be nice if you would explain this to us. Item number 3 relates to the trail itself. I had heard about the city wanting streets to go to, through, and along all trails and open space so ALL of the public has easily access them from here, there and everywhere. I don't know if this is true or not,but this is what I have been told. My question is what has happened to the concept of quaint, small neighborhood parks?Places for families to connect and children to play? If it is the case, that now everyone must have access to everything, then have you considered how it degrades the very essence of open spaces and trails,when there are cars right there, crossing it and running along side it? Isn't the whole idea to have a place where people can get out and walk in a natural setting? So having unneeded crossings(i.e. Kenyon extended) is creating potential danger of being hit by a car, not to mention taking away from the peaceful, quiet trail system we now have, each time there is yet another crossing. I have been told that the city actually wants 3 crossings of that trail within just a few hundred yards. How can this possibly be in the best interest of the public? One other interesting aspect of this street extension is that I have been told by the developers representing the Foundation that they are not advocating that Kenyon Drive connect, that the Foundation is not advocating that the street connect, I would doubt that the Friends of Burke Park, the Park and Recreation Board, or GVLT would want to see an unnecessary trail crossings,which this connection would create. And I assure you the neighborhood does not want it,nor do we want elected officials deciding what is best for us without even coming here,researching the situation more carefully and listening and weighing our concerns,which we feel are valid. When we are told"it is a done deal", well it causes me at least to raise a brow to our local government, if that is indeed the case. I am hoping that you will take a closer look at this upcoming subdivision and carefully weigh all of my comments as well as those of my wonderful neighbors. And I would love to meet with you up on our street to talk with you in person. You can call or email me and I will coordinate with my neighbors, as I know many of my neighbors would like to meet with you as well. Thank you for your consideration of this very important matter before you. Please take a moment to reflect on the questions that I have posed. I look forward to hearing from you sooner than later,but at your convenience. Sincerely, Peg Potter, Homeowner 1715 Kenyon Drive Bozeman, MT 406.570.8828 peg@pegpotter.com I would specifically ask that after you reflect on my questions, that you take the time to answer every question I have posed in this letter,please. Thank you for your attention to this matter. June 30,2006 U JUL 0 3 2006 Re: The Knolls at Hillcrest Preliminary Plat(#P-06028) DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT To the Planning Board members: I am writing in reference to the aforementioned proposed development under review for the Bozeman Deaconess Foundation. I have concerns as to how it may affect my neighborhood off Highland Boulevard on Kenyon Drive. My husband and I as well as our neighbors and friends have been told that the extension of our street is"a done deal",as in already been decided that it will connect on through, in spite of the fact that there has not yet been a opportunity for public comments during a preliminary plat hearing. Still I hope you will considerate the following information and our perspective,as I speak not only for myself,but also for many of my neighbors. I have been told that the reasons for extending Kenyon include: 1)fire protection and public safety, 2)that the 2020 Plan or UDO says all roads must connect and no cul-de- sacs allowed in any future developments,and 3)that the 2020 Plan or UDO says all parks and open space need to have public access along and through to insure that everyone can easily access them. I have not personally verified these 3 items,but I assume that it probably says this or something like this in some document somewhere,being used as a basis to take a wonderful small neighborhood and potentially make it less desirable on the basis of some perceived greater good. I would like to address each of these 3 items,starting with number 1. In regards to safety,I would ask that you take some time from your busy schedule to drive up to our neighborhood. Start at Highland and turn west on Lomas, Take a quick right(north)on Chambers then a quick left(west)on Baxter. Notice the steep,blind turn as you head up Baxter. Do you really think this road was ever meant to be a through(collector)street? Now continue up around the curve to the north and at O'Connell,turn left(west), head up the short hill to Kenyon on your right,turn and stop. Please read the sign. I have attached a copy. It says "Road Closed Except Local Property Owners 8:00 PM- 6:00 AM By Order of Dir. (Director I assume)of Public Safety City of Bozeman." So it sounds like Kenyon is not a very safe street. I suspect that making this a"Through Street"will not suddenly make it a"safe"street that should be open at all times. If anything it will be less safe and here is why. Continue to proceed up Kenyon and notice the very steep grade and blind curve at the top of the hill. See reference photo included. Now imagine, children on foot or bicycles up around the corner, along(in)the street,heading up to get to the trail. Why in the street? There are no sidewalks. Is there room for them?Well we were not required by the city to put them in a few years ago when everyone else was. And the grade that those sidewalks would need to be at going up the hill would be fairly steep, again not the safest place to be. 1 I do not believe that we would be"more safe"if this street now had through traffic going up and down. Have you ever been up or down this street when it snows or is icy? I do not believe this road was built and designed with the intention to become a through street. And I do not believe that new neighborhoods that the city reviews now would get preliminary plat approval with streets like ours engineered at the grade that ours it at, especially adding the blind curve to the equation. I have helped push cars up this hill and I have watched unsavvy drivers leaving the neighborhood go down the hill too fast. Our neighbor Tad Weaver at the bottom of the hill has had cars slide into his mailbox. Yet we are told we will be"safer"with this road extended,a road never engineered in the first place to handle any degree of traffic. In regards to item number 2, everything connects, no cul-de-sacs, I ask why? Are we not allowed to be part of a neighborhood with its own unique identity and character? Must we all now be part of some big continuum? Why would our"wise"city planners, appointed and elected want to degrade a charming small neighborhood by forcing it to connect to some new neighborhood in the name of connectivity and safety?And the new neighborhood isn't wanting to be connected either. Yes I agree that connectivity is good for dispersing traffic,but to have everything connect is too far in the opposite direction of all cul-de-sacs. There needs to be a balance and there needs to be room for exceptions both ways. And when topography makes it impractical,unwise, and unsafe to connect, then decisions to connect should be reconsidered. The 2020 Plan does not say all roads must connect and this is an example of a good reason why they should not connect. I find it ironic that when I ask people if they would rather live on a cul-de-sac or on a through street they ALWAYS say on a cul-de-sac. No one has yet answered"through street". Yet our UDO has taken away our right to create new cul-de-sac, in essence taking away our right to live the way we want to live. I would sincerely hope that local officials would think about this and make the UDO more flexible in this regard. There needs to be a balance. I also have been told that an easement was granted by Bozeman Deaconess Foundation back in 1987 as part of a requirement of platting a minor subdivision,making it possible for the proposed 5 lot subdivision on Kenyon Drive(by Ken LeClair who already has 4 lots),along with a hammerhead cul-de-sac on the other side of the trail in the hospital field to the north. My understanding is the decision to act on his proposal was continued until after The Knolls at Hillcrest project was through preliminary plat approval,as it was the city's intention not to grant the cul-de-sac,but rather just extend the road on through. 2 Again, it sounds like public comment was never even intended to be considered. And even though,at this time, I am not writing in reference specifically to that development, but because it is related to this one, I shall comment on the LeClair project. My comments are these. Why does that developer get to have 5 lots instead of 4?It just decreases safety on our street by creating more traffic. I realize the city built the access road to the water tower in the wrong place, but it could be torn out and rebuilt, or the 4 lots could be reconfigured and LeClair would still have room for his platting requirements, and he could build a driveway to his last lot off the cul-de-sac. The existing cul-de-sac could be extended and improved to meet fire truck turn radius and be done without crossing the trail. And as far as access to the Burke Family lots to the west of the trail and the current trail currently running through these lots,access to them is provided for on the preliminary plat proposed by the Bozeman Deaconess Foundation land. So extending Kenyon Drive is not really needed to accommodate that access. A parking lot could be provided off the hospital land for access to the park,helping to alleviate excess traffic on Kenyon. Or what about Josephine Park with access to it from the hospital land? I was told LeClair was allowed to put Highwood Estates in to the east of the park without having to grant a future access easement to/along Josephine Park. Is that fair and just? My point is there are other alternatives; it would be nice if someone was interested in helping us and looking into these other solutions and helping us to preserve our unique and special neighborhood. We do not want to see the quality of our existing neighborhood sacrificed, degraded or devalued at the expense of a new neighborhood. The new neighborhood could deal with all the issues from their land without having to impact our street,which was never designed with the intention of handling the comings and goings of a larger neighborhood. Item number 3 relates to the trail itself. I had heard about the city wanting streets to go to, through, and along all trails and open space so ALL of the public could easily access them from here,there and everywhere. I don't know if this is true or not,but this is what I have been told. My question is what has happened to the concept of quaint, small neighborhood parks?Places for families to connect and children to play? If it is the case,that now everyone must have access to everything,then has anyone considered how it degrades the very essence of open spaces and trails,when there are cars right there, crossing it and running along side it? I have also been told that the City is saying they are going to require that Ida Avenue be put in along the hospital property and along the trail. Does this really make sense? How does that make the trail better? 3 Isn't the whole idea of parks and trail and open space to have a place where people can get out and walk in a natural setting? So having unneeded crossings(i.e. Kenyon extended)is creating potential danger of being hit by a car,not to mention taking away from the peaceful, quiet trail system we now have, each time there is yet another crossing. And to install a street parallel to the trail? How can this possibly be in the best interest of the public? One other interesting aspect of this Kenyon street extension is that I have been told by the developers representing the Foundation that they were not advocating that Kenyon Drive connect,that the Foundation was not advocating that the street connect, I would doubt that the Friends of Burke Park,the Park and Recreation Board,or GVLT would want to see unnecessary trail crossings,which this connection would create. And I assure you my immediate neighbors do not want it,nor do we want elected officials deciding what is best for us without even coming here,researching the situation more carefully and listening and weighing our concerns,which we feel are valid. When we are told"it is a done deal"it causes me to raise a brow to our local government. It is not only politically incorrect to say such a thing; I feel it is also in violation of our right to be heard and our concerns to be considered. I am hoping that you will take a closer look at this upcoming subdivision and carefully weigh all of my comments as well as those of my wonderful neighbors. If you are already familiar with the area I reference,maybe you will come to the public hearings and support our cause. I have enclosed a copy of the hearing notice with this letter. I welcome your thoughts and comments and any help or consideration you can give us. Sincerely, Peg Potter,Homeowner 1715 Kenyon Drive Bozeman,MT 406.570.8828 email: peg@pegpotter.com 4 ! T I`7. 1 ,A�S .9G..sas>e ax•w t pt�aaAG.•sos xa ATw I Z 4��'.r.P. GLL•ta51B' 1 DM MONTANA 5 � nL QUALITY REVIEW 00 ,� g y �ss- �e S m�e.n,Wewlm j I i 9EGaY ,� 0 k d MCmlmAf dAGwTf ASPEN PGINiE .SAT NACREsr 9 PO f Daparo,wrtW Environmental I I 1 N�R'GM'UP4VAY IYyd !-72 PARK FASEMEM J b ^.-.P,,!•a r—'F�r� �I l aa,�'�j'I 1 PER FLLAI AS.PAGE 1592 91RCHW000 Z .f EST L• ATHILLCR Ae..snr,e aPE )oY �man.M.mna.dona,ae { �1 P:erna = * - :aaaP.aoe•+saa. .aammad and na.band I�_! '• ' �._L.,al.m �.. ''• �a< e,M h,—,y easPtl m, n Usa. `w�Q I I I vca !l ,��•`' / °•,�pa• �, Ols��ba'aP RI I I.o, ..n mar w ,l �. i•wr. ' a�ala.=s°r ssxi-r 3 % FORMER Fi C.04.Y 7 TRAcrxoP c.Gs.maT w.�..:.m �'"q3'� {y( I ( j� / `� E,ss`r1drr•'r tiq�, `� 1�� U 8 /J IORTGAGEE ps I I t i h ��^ ? n . elew w� cc �e I l j A,a ImY1Iw1 rewe°we�. r` n wdlena now eelna aaam �9a 't i I ,�. ! I n.e.wnlm ro ded�,ed a I I I �. e ! a,pYlnem I I I• 0 I aa.°a,a�,�lrao a I { ! �� a I am,m xrous LANE waud ------- ---- -----0X--- -"—\--a—SSHEET me same. O t Z. r3,9 do _ —�z;ml I .1 I I Im41 .. nun �e 8a I boyy l ( -T aronel t,nd sa.ey«. 1 I I I I " I------ -------- - ------------------------ e08.ea"d�aY.dhrma. I j I �' I A �� o aaer .nPw«e i I" 1 I -10io. wml the M°n ana -tOaNmugh 763E25 =2DO6' i 'mn i i =e4-,4 '. gg�3�m,yl; r ' PPv�3 _ —JOSEPEIINEI,ANE----�- ---�---._._._._._._ CORDER _._._._ I d tathl cmmM.M°mana, wr�� qq91 qgq,"J' .. .., I .._ filedM mY olfiro r'9 I `Xi ( m i 1 ..,,. ._, ,01 uu •_• ,mi ,ow q Yga® I 3�� i•tj C—tyN Montana. SURER I I I 1 .�,._•. CWowgy-Mnmauty a eh haracY t ( I ; " _ r YaaPaa 1 ( I l ---- — a----- — j------ --- Pncoy z Mai i, I 8� I f I I .114 Sec T FL at14 sec. T. R. F F THE PURPOSE OF THIS SURVEY Subdivision Areas: F CERTIFICATES 60lots 16.747aores ® 1s ZS 6E. ® ALPIN IS TO CREATE AN 80-LOT SUBDIVISION Road Area 7.315 acres EXTERIOR BOUNDARY THIS SURVEI'WAS PERFORMED FOR Open Space 7.499 acres ® ® SUFlVENINGPz ► VICINITY MAP THE BOZEMAN DEACONESS FOUNDATION Total Area 31.561 acres /'1 1 r e Bo2�`�t �•.� '�, CITY OF BOZEMAN Bozeman, Montana grlN CO. August 4, 1997 Edmund Burke Burke, Sakai, et al 3100 Mauka Tower, Grosvenor Center 737 Bishop Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Dear Mr. Burke, Thank you for your letter of July 17, 1997 to Assistant City Manager Ron Brey. Mr. Brey has reviewed your request and finds that the City of Bozeman has committed to ensure, during city review of adjacent subdivisions, that streets and utilities are designed to provide access to the parcels retained by the Burke family. The portion of Ida Street proposed for vacation at this time is not an element of this assured access and your acquiescence to the abandonment does not waive your right of access to the retained lots. I concur with his findings. Please notify me if you need for further information. Sincerely, CLARK V. JOHNSON City Manager CVJ:rb Attachment- Section 4., Retained Property, of the Bargain Sale Agreement between the Burke family and the City of Bozeman for Burke Park cc: Andrew C. Epple, Planning Director (w/attachment) Chris Boyd (w/o attachment) - lam \e\ C5 N A- C- 041-5 -ter. s P VA e Street address:411 East Main Street Phone:(406)552-2300 Mailing address:P.O.Box 640 t/�n �� Fax:(406)582-2323 Bozeman,Montana 59771-0640 TDD:(406)582-2301 RIDGE LINE Op S�en c ® ®® ®® O pub 00 ® s � Pace ®� Peh lc 10 3 Space q r--ir--ir--ir--ir- -ir--it--, I ct 7� KEI. ON IVE `\ r Gcn I I- -Ir--ir--ir--ir--it--- I - pr�� .� Ll ALUDLEY O r- r- -O m ,) m rorROP- rn r---� r--- i , . L---J '� iM�. s.. ...... L---J p f---1 r---1 r x _ I N I y I m I p r___1 w I m I i I C/]y Z ~• ( O , I I nm LJ < L---J 'c3 y io nl rt �,� _ •� m f- N �® L---J L- -J -.. --- I I I I I I I I I I I I I d wo - '� I I A9EEYY - I ti f 11 I I I I m I I N I I c I I w lJob J L__J L__J L__J L__J L--_I 40 M � • � � PIL..JT KID B R ,J•' • ♦� � � � - "ram `\ \� �� o Pa e IV1• t an oulevard 71T s! d 40Lti. 'Zi I � I r_�IF II � II � II N 3 r--7 II II I�c (D c o o �• w x c c O n (p (D NON I NON >Now C!� �rl rt cn cn -U1 '--`cn -cn X rt Ort rt O O (D (D A _ K 'r F-� 0 o o X K- O x o `C o � o � � rt cn Prepared By: THE KNOLLS AT HILLCREST / G� N Bozeman Deaconess CONCEPT PLAN DEVELOPMENT Health Services 3985 Valley Commons Dr Last Update-05/10/06 Bozeman NIT 59718 H:\Deaconess\Engineering-Design\The Knolls West\Pre-Plat\Drawings\Knolls West Concept Plan.dwg