Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4-02-07-5_250-456_Baxter Meadows Planned Unit Development Phase 4 Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat #P-07004 Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Lanette Windemaker, AICP, Contract Planner SUBJECT: Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision, #P-07004 MEETING DATE: Monday, April 2, 2007 RECOMMENDATION: The City Commission approves application #P-07004 with the conditions of approval in the staff report. BACKGROUND: This is a preliminary plat application to subdivide ~ 67 acres into 4 lots for further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B located in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Since no development is permitted on the lots created by this subdivision until the property is subject to further subdivision, the City of Bozeman has agreed that this subdivision is not subject to public improvements at this time. This subdivision will be followed shortly by a major subdivision for building development. The property is located west of Davis Lane and on the north and south sides of Baxter Lane, and is zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District). There is a zone map amendment under review which will make the zoning correspond with the property line that was established on February 14, 2007, through recordation of a boundary relocation exemption between the Regional Park and Baxter Meadows. Following approval of that zone map amendment, the property will be zoned R-3 and B- 2. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None. FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time, but will include increased property tax revenues from new development, along with increased costs to deliver municipal services to the property. ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. CONTACT: Please email Lanette Windemaker at lwindemaker@bozeman.net if you have any questions prior to the public hearing. APPROVED BY: Andrew Epple, Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager 555 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT BAXTER MEADOWS PUD PHASE 4 MINOR SUBDIVISION FILE NO. P-07004 Item: Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-07004, to subdivide ~ 67 acres into 4 lots for further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B located in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. Applicant/Owners: Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste. 300, Billings, MT 59102. Representative: PC Development, 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718. Date/Time: Before the Bozeman Planning Board on Tuesday, March 6, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, Bozeman, Montana, and Before the Bozeman City Commission on Monday, April 2, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, Bozeman, Montana. Report by: Lanette Windemaker, AICP: Contract Planner. Recommendation: Conditional Approval. PROJECT LOCATION The subject property is described as ~ 67 acres of land located west of Davis Lane and on the north and south sides of Baxter Lane, is legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B, located in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District). Please refer to the vicinity map on the following page. 556 PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting a Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat approval to subdivide ~ 67 acres into 4 lots for further subdivision. Since no development is permitted on the lots created by this subdivision until the property is subject to further subdivision, the City of Bozeman has agreed that this subdivision is not subject to public improvements at this time. The subdivision would have access from Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. The necessary Preliminary Plat Supplements were submitted or waived by the Development Review Committee (DRC). ZONING DESIGNATION & LAND USES The subject property is zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District). There is a zone map amendment under review which will make the zoning correspond with the property line that was established on February 14, 2007, through recordation of a boundary relocation exemption between the Regional Park and Baxter Meadows. Following approval of that zone map amendment, the property will be zoned R-3 and B-2. 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 B-2, Community Business District, is to provide for a broad range of mutually supportive retail and service functions located in clustered areas bordered on one or more sides by limited access arterial streets. The intent of the PLI, Public Lands and Institutions District, is to provide for major public and quasi-public uses outside of other districts. Not all public and quasi-public uses need to be classified PLI. Some may fit within another district, however larger areas will be designated PLI. P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 2557 The subject property is traversed north to south by the Spring Ditch but is otherwise vacant. The following land uses and zoning are adjacent to the subject property: North: B-2 (Community Business District) – Baxter Meadows remainders. East: R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) – West Winds PUD. AS (County Zoning Agricultural Suburban) – Unincorporated. South: PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) – Regional Park. West: PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) – Regional Park. B-2 (Community Business District) – Baxter Meadows Phase 2. ADOPTED GROWTH POLICY DESIGNATION The property on the south side of Baxter Lane is designated as “Residential” in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The R-3 (Residential Medium Density District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions) zoning designations are consistent with this land use designation of the property. The property on the north side of Baxter Lane is designated as “Community Commercial” in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. The B-2 (Community Business District) zoning designation is consistent with this land use designation of the property. 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. Community Commercial. Activities within this land use category are the basic employment and services necessary for a vibrant community. Establishments located within these categories draw from the community as a whole for their employee and customer base and are sized accordingly. A broad range of functions including retail, education, professional and personal services, offices, P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 3558 residences, and general service activities typify this designation. In the “center-based” land use pattern, Community Commercial areas are integrated with significant transportation corridors, including transit and non-automotive routes, to facilitate efficient travel opportunities. Community Commercial areas are generally 120 to 140 acres in size and are activity centers for an area of several square miles surrounding them. The density of development is expected to be higher than currently seen in most commercial areas in Bozeman and should include multi-story buildings. It is considered desirable to have residences on upper floors in some circumstances. PRELIMINARY PLAT SUPPLEMENTS A pre-application was reviewed by DRC in August 2006. The following concerns were noted: the need for improved multi model connectivity to the east; reverse frontage lots should only be allowed with superior design; pedestrian safety issues related to school access routes; the need for park and open space areas to be both physically and visually accessible; the need for street frontage on park areas; and the need to achieve minimum net density. However, these issues cannot be addressed with this subdivision, and will need to be addressed at the time of future subdivision. Provided below is a summary review of the Preliminary Plat Supplements submitted with the Preliminary Plat application. A. Surface Water: The Spring Ditch bisects the subdivision running from the south side to the northern property line. The Streams and Ditches Map for the City of Bozeman, provided by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife & Parks, identified the watercourse as a “stream/ditch” with associated wetlands. As a result, any activity within the identified watercourse and/or wetlands area (i.e., road construction) will require applicable Section 310 and 404 Permits. The applicant proposes to rebuilt a portion of the Spring Ditch. B. Floodplains: No floodplain study was required for this portion of Baxter Meadows. C. Groundwater: Groundwater depths in the area of Baxter Meadows vary depending on proximity to the ditch, watercourse and associated wetlands. The applicant’s supplemental information notes that static water levels range from 1 to 9 feet below ground level. With the future subdivision, staff will require a note on the final plat that there is the potential for seasonal high ground water tables within the area of the subdivision. In addition, buildings proposed for construction with crawl spaces or basements shall be required to submit with each Building Permit an Engineer Certification regarding depth of ground water and soil conditions and proposed mitigation methods. Installation of municipal water and sanitary sewer services will greatly reduce any concerns regarding the potential of groundwater degradation. D. Geology - Soils - Slopes: There are no known geologic hazards associated with this site, with exception to the Seismic Zone 3 for earthquakes, which is common for the Bozeman area. No significant physical features or topographical conditions have been identified, and no slopes in excess of fifteen percent (15%) grade P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 4559 are evident. Of the principle soil types identified by the Department of Natural Resources Conservation Service in the area several have hydric components, and several have moderate to severe limitations for building and site development. A geotechnical evaluation was completed in 2001 to further identify soil limitations. E. Vegetation: No significant levels of mature vegetation (trees and large bushes) exist on the site in question, due to the agricultural history of the property. F. Wildlife: Due to the agricultural history of the property and limited mature vegetation in the area, any potential impacts to wildlife and wildlife habitat are limited to white-tailed deer, small mammals and birds. No known endangered species or critical game ranges have been identified in the area. The 50-foot watercourse setback along the existing watercourse will protect any riparian environment already established on the property. G. Historical Features: Due to the agricultural use of the property for many years, there is low likelihood of impact on cultural properties. H. Agriculture: Historically, the subject property has been used for agricultural purposes with the majority of the parcel in cultivated crops or pastureland. I. Agricultural Water User Facilities: The applicant has indicated that agricultural water levels in the Spring Ditch will be maintained. J. Water and Sewer: An extension of municipal water mains in the area will provide water for domestic and fire protection services. An extension of municipal sewage lines will provide for sewage collection and disposal. Final approval of the water distribution system and sewage collection and disposal system for this subdivision proposal will be obtained through the normal approval procedures of preliminary and final plat review by the City Engineer’s Office, Superintendent of Water/Sewer, and Montana Department of Environmental Quality. K. Stormwater Management: Stormwater management will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. L. Streets, Roads, and Alleys: Access to the subdivision will be from Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. Both Baxter Lane and Davis Lane are designated as a Minor Arterial. Two future trail corridors are indicated on Figure 6.5 of the Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update. One trail corridor runs north / south from Oak Street to Baxter Lane. The second trail corridor runs east / west from Davis Lane to the north / south trail corridor. P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 5560 Access: Required improvements to street and access limitations will be determined at the time of further subdivision. Bicycle and Pedestrian Pathways, Lanes and Routes: According to Bike Route Network of the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (Figures 6-3 and 6-4) and the Recommended Street Standards of the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan (Figures 11-3 and 11-4), bike lanes and pedestrian facilities are required along both Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. Trails: The trail system will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. M. Utilities: Utilities will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. N. Educational Facilities: This subdivision will not have an impact of the educational facilities. O. Land Use: Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off-site improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further subdivision or the written consent of the City of Bozeman. P. Parks and Recreation Facilities: Parks and recreation facilities will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. Q. Neighborhood Center Plan: The neighborhood center for the Baxter Meadows PUD project is located in the commercial area to the north. R. Lighting Plan. Street lighting will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. S. Miscellaneous: The proposed subdivision is adjacent to the regional park on the south and west. However, no direct impacts to the regional park, or other public lands, have been identified with this subdivision proposal. On or near the subdivision, there is no known health, safety hazards or other nuisances, such as unpleasant odors, unusual noise, dust or smoke, with exception to the typical risks identified with seismic activity. STAFF FINDINGS/REVIEW CRITERIA P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 6561 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 demonstrates that development of the subdivision complies 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, the WRB, the R&PAB Subdivision Review Committee 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. Effects on agriculture, agricultural water user facilities, local services, the natural environment, wildlife and the wildlife habitat, and public health and safety. 1. Effects on Agriculture. Historically, the subject property has been used for agricultural purposes with the majority of parcel in cultivated crops or pastureland, most recently barley. 2. Effects on Agricultural Water User Facilities. The applicant has indicated that agricultural water levels in the Spring Ditch will be maintained. 3. Effects on Local Services. Water/Sewer: Water/Sewer services can be provided by extension and connection to the municipal water and sewer systems. Streets: Access to the subdivision will be from the existing Baxter Lane and Davis Lane. 4. Effects on the Natural Environment. Stormwater management will be addressed at the time of further subdivision. Applicant has entered into an agreement for a Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan with the Gallatin County Weed Board. 5. Effects on Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat. Due to its historical uses and the development of surrounding lands, no significant adverse effects on wildlife or their habitat have been identified on the property. 6. Effects on Public Health and Safety. Because municipal sewer will service future development in the subdivision, the threat of groundwater degradation from onsite sewage disposal will be eliminated. There are no known, unmitigated natural or man-made hazards on this property. B. Compliance with the following: 1. The survey requirements provided for in Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 7562 The subdivision complies or will comply with survey requirements of the Act. 2. The local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal Code. 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. The following requirements are standards of the Bozeman Municipal Code and shall be addressed on the final plat: a. Per Section 18.50.090, executed waivers of right to protest creation of special improvement districts (SIDs) for a park maintenance district shall be filed and of record with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder prior to final plat approval. A copy of the executed documents shall be submitted with the final plat. b. The Final Plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates. The Final Plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or heavier stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies; and five (5) paper prints. c. Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D.6, conditional approval of the Preliminary Plat shall be in force for not more than one calendar year for minor subdivisions, two years for single- phased major subdivisions and three years for multi-phased major subdivisions. Prior to that expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of request for the extension of the period to the Planning Director for the City Commission’s consideration. The City Commission may, at the written request of the developer, extend its approval for no more than one calendar year, except that the City Commission may extend its approval for a period of more than one year if that approval period is included as a specific condition of a written subdivision improvements agreement between the City Commission and the developer, provided for in §18.74.060, BMC. d. The applicant shall submit with the application for Final Plat review and approval, a written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has been satisfactorily addressed. 3. The local subdivision review procedure provided for in Part 6 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. The hearings before the Planning Board and the City Commission have been properly noticed, as required in the Bozeman Municipal Code. The notice was mailed to all adjoining property owners by certified mail on February 16, 2007. The proposed project was noticed in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on February 21, 2007. P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 8563 C. The provision of easements for the location and installation of any planned utilities. All utilities and necessary utility easements will be provided and depicted on the final plat. D. The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the required notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument of transfer concerning the parcel. All lots within the subdivision will have direct access to the dedicated public streets or easements. PUBLIC COMMENT No public comment has been received to date. Any public comments received after the date of this report will be distributed at the public hearing. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off- site improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further subdivision or the written consent of the City of Bozeman. 2. The zoning map amendment shall be approved by the Commission, but the ordinance need not be finalized, prior to final plat approval. 3. As further subdivision review is required before any portion of this subdivision can be developed, the provision of water rights or cash in-lieu thereof as required in the Annexation Agreement, shall be delayed until the property is further subdivided. If, through any relaxation of this requirement, any portion of this minor subdivision is developed for any reason or use, ALL water rights or cash in-lieu thereof for the entire minor subdivision must be provided prior to issuance of final site plan approval and/or a building permit, whichever first occurs. Water rights, or if water rights are not available cash-in-lieu thereof, are calculated by the City Engineer. 4. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal Code. 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. 5. This property is in the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. The payback shall be made prior to filing of the final plat. CONCLUSION / RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to Section 18.06.040.D of the Bozeman Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall review the preliminary plat and supplementary information to determine if the proposed plat is in P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 9564 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, April 2, 2007, hearing which begins at 6:00 p.m. The Planning Board Resolution #P- 07004 and minutes from the Planning Board’s March 6, 2007, meeting will be forwarded to the City Commission and made a part of the Commission’s record. THE BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD WILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOZEMAN 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 BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Potter Clinton Development, Inc., 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718. Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste. 300, Billings, MT 59102. P07004 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Minor Subdivision: Staff Report 10565 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Subdivision Preliminary Plat # P07004 1 RESOLUTION #P-07004 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION ON ~ 67 ACRES TO BE SUBDIVIDED INTO 4 LOTS FOR FURTHER SUBDIVISION. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-3 (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT), B-2 (COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT) AND PLI (PUBLIC LANDS AND INSTITUTIONS DISTRICT), AND IS GENERALLY LOCATED WEST OF DAVIS LANE AND ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF BAXTER LANE. THE PROPERTY IS LEGALLY DESCRIBED LOT 4A-1 OF COS 2202B, AND IS LOCATED IN THE SE ¼ OF SECTION 34, T1S, R5E AND IN THE NE ¼ OF SECTION 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has adopted a Growth Policy pursuant to 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 applicant/owner, Baxter Meadows Development LP, 1500 Poly Dr., Ste. 300, Billings, MT 59102; represented by PC Development, 3985 Valley Commons Drive, Bozeman, MT 59718, submitted a Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application on ~ 67 acres to be subdivided into 4 lots for further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B. The property is situated in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana; and WHEREAS, the proposed Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application has been properly submitted, reviewed, and advertised in accordance with the procedures of Section 18.76 of the Bozeman Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board held a public hearing on Tuesday, March 6, 2007, to receive and review all written and oral testimony on the request for said Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Staff presented the staff report on the request for said Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application; and WHEREAS, the applicant described the reason for the subdivision; and WHEREAS, no members of the public were present speaking in favor of or opposition to said Subdivision Preliminary Plat; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board reviewed the application against the requirements of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act, and found that the Subdivision 566 Baxter Meadows PUD Phase 4 Subdivision Preliminary Plat # P07004 2 Preliminary Plat Application would comply with those requirements with the recommended conditions of approval; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Bozeman Planning Board, on a vote of 5 to 0, recommends to the Bozeman City Commission that the ~ 67 acres to be subdivided into 4 lots for further subdivision on property zoned R-3 (Residential Medium Density District), B-2 (Community Business District) and PLI (Public Lands and Institutions District), which is generally located west of Davis Lane and on the north and south sides of Baxter Lane, on property legally described as Lot 4A-1 of COS 2202B, and situated in the SE ¼ of Section 34, T1S, R5E and in the NE ¼ of Section 3, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, be approved with the 5 conditions which follow; and 1. Building Permits will not be issued for any lot in this subdivision until all required on and off- site improvements are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No building or structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on any lot in this subdivision until this restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further subdivision or the written consent of the City of Bozeman. 1. The zoning map amendment shall be approved by the Commission, but the ordinance need not be finalized, prior to final plat approval. 2. As further subdivision review is required before any portion of this subdivision can be developed, the provision of water rights or cash in-lieu thereof as required in the Annexation Agreement, shall be delayed until the property is further subdivided. If, through any relaxation of this requirement, any portion of this minor subdivision is developed for any reason or use, ALL water rights or cash in-lieu thereof for the entire minor subdivision must be provided prior to issuance of final site plan approval and/or a building permit, whichever first occurs. Water rights, or if water rights are not available cash-in-lieu thereof, are calculated by the City Engineer. 3. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal Code. 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. This property is in the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. The payback shall be made prior to filing of the final plat. DATED THIS 6th DAY OF MARCH, 2007 Resolution #P-07004 _____________________________ ____________________________ Andrew C. Epple, Planning Director Randy Carpenter, Chairman Protempore Planning & Community Development Dept. City of Bozeman Planning Board 567 1 ** MINUTES ** CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD, COMMUNITY ROOM, GALLATIN COUNTY COURTHOUSE 311 WEST MAIN STREET TUESDAY, MARCH 6TH, 2007 7:30 P.M. ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairman Pro Tempore, Randy Carpenter called the meeting to order at 7:55PM and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present: Members Absent: Randy Carpenter, Chairman Pro Tempore JP Pomnichowski (excused) Brian Caldwell Erik Henyon (excused) Caren Roberty Steve Kirchhoff, Commission Liaison Ed Sypinski William Quinn Staff Present: Andrew Epple, Director of Planning and Community Development Jody Sanford, Senior Planner Lanette Windemaker, Contract Planner Allyson Bristor, Associate Planner Kimberly Kenney-Lyden, Recording Secretary Sean Becker, Commission Liaison Guests Present: Kenneth R. MacDonald Eugene Graf Erin Graf Jim McKenna Heidi Graf KC Cassidy Jerry Smania Mike Nornemann Steve Wagner WW Locke Lowell Hirlermar Ross Taylor CG Kress Stephen Johnson Harley Huestis Jason Leep Tom Schmidt Paul Brock Rick Meis Leonard J. Baluski Noah Poritz Joyce Hynes Bart Manion Shereen Brock Meagan Snodgrass Larry Cloninger Dexter Wester Carol Wester Colleen O'Quinn Matt Merrill Susan Bolgiano Kathy Hayner Donald McBride Chuck Paden Diane Wheeler Brad Ebel Martha Wheeler Frank Munshower Nicolas Grochowski Al Lien Cheryl Ridgely Carol Anderson 00:05:40 [19:55:39] ITEM 2. PUBLIC 568 2 COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) Seeing there was none, Randy Carpenter closed this portion of the meeting. 0:06:00 [19:55:56] ITEM 3. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 21ST, 2007 Seeing there were no changes, additions or corrections, Brian Caldwell recommended approval of the minutes, seconded by Bill Quinn and Ed Sypinski. All in favor, motion passed 5-0. 0:06:23 [19:56:09] ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Growth Policy Amendment Application, #P-07003 (Cornerstone) - A Growth Policy Amendment Application requested by the owner, Alan Fulton, and applicant, Covenant Investment LLC, and representative, Intrinsik Architecture, to change the land use designation set by the Future Land Use Map of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan from Future Urban to Residential for 40 acres of land just southwest of the existing Laurel Glen Subdivision. This property is legally described as Tract 1 and 2 of COS No. 1581, NW ¼ , NW ¼, Section 9, T2S, R5E, P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana. (Bristor) Associate Planner Allyson Bristor stated the applicant has withdrawn the Growth Policy Amendment, it was withdrawn today, March 6th, 2007. Therefore, there will be no presentation tonight. 2. Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application, #P-07004 (Baxter Meadows PUD, Phase IV) – A Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application requested by the owner and applicant, Baxter meadows Development LP, and representative, PC Development to subdivide ~67 acres into four lots for further subdivision on property legally described as Lot 4A-1, COS 2202B, in the SE ¼ section 34, T2S, R5E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Windemaker) 0:07:46 [19:57:39] Staff Report Lanette Windemaker, contract planner, gave the staff report. The applicant is requesting to divide 67 aces. This is an unusual subdivision request. Ms. Windemaker noted the City has agreed to accept this request with the provision that there will be nothing developed on these four lots until the rest of this area is subdivided. She stated this parcel is located west of the West Winds subdivision and on the southeast corner of Baxter Meadows subdivision. There has been no public comment submitted to date. There are standard provisions and on page 9 of the staff report and there are five conditions of approval. Contract Planner Windemaker stated the City has agreed to delay the water rights until the rest of the property is subdivided. She closed her portion of the report by noting this is in the Baxter Lane signal payback district. 0:11:43 [19:57:48] Questions for Staff Bill Quinn asked Ms. Windemaker if this project is a minor subdivision and she replied that technically, it is five lots meaning it is a minor subdivision. However, this is a re-subdivision so this application gets thrown into the major subdivision review process. Brian Caldwell asked how conditions one and three would relate to site plan development. Planner Windemaker no site plans will be allowed, but they will have to come forward with a subdivision review process. They may have a site plan concurrently with that, however it is possible to see one lot subdivision review. 569 3 Randy Carpenter asked Ms. Windemaker to expound on the Baxter Lane Signal payback district. She responded it is a small amount of all of Baxter Meadows is included in, it is based on acreage and based on the final plat. It was based off of the improvements made off of Baxter Lane and established during the time of annexation. Brian Caldwell asked how this would be affected with any new SID's. Planner Windemaker stated there aren't any SID's they are involved in. This is the only payback district that engineering said they were included in. 0:14:46 [20:02:01] Applicant Presentation Harley Huestis representing PC Development stated the basic purpose of this application is to get it ready for further subdivision. They are working with Baxter Meadows Development to develop the park south of Baxter Lane. This is just a legal remedy to transfer land so they can move forward with the subdivision development. 0:16:23 [20:05:02] Discussion Brian Caldwell stated it seems like there is a bit of housecleaning with the configuration of the road and it seems to have transpired with the regional park. He closed by stating this remedies the boundary description of the property as well as its ability to be transferred. He noted this is an agreeable item and the Planning Board should move forward with a recommendation of approval. 0:17:11 [20:05:20] Motion and Vote Brian Caldwell moved to recommend approval of PUD Application #P-07004 with conditions as recommended by staff, seconded by Caren Roberty. All in favor. Motion passed 5-0. 3. Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development Application, #P-07007 (The Knolls at Hillcrest PUD) – A Conditional Use Permit for a Planned Unit Development Application, with relaxations, to allow concurrent construction for an 80-lot major Subdivision that received preliminary plat approval on July 24, 2006. This application would also permanently protect 3.7 acres of open space in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan planning area by transferring the right to develop 12 homes to the nearby Bozeman Deaconess Health Services (BDHS) Subarea Plan planning area. The first 3.86 acre property is legally described as Lot 2 of Certificate of Survey No. 203 and a portion of Tract 1 of Certificate of Survey No. 1557, NW¼, SE¼ of Section 18, T2S, R6E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, is located at 1417 South Church Avenue and 425 East Lincoln Street. The second 31.56 acre property is legally described as the south portion of Tract 1, COS 2047, E½ of Section 18, T2S, R6E, PMM, Gallatin County, Montana, is located just south of the existing Aspen Point complex at 1201 Highland Boulevard. (Sanford) 0:18:25 [20:07:30] Staff Report Senior Planner, Jody Sanford, gave the staff report. She stated the applicants are seeking no changes in the layout of the subdivision. This project received preliminary plat approval last July. They want to do a planned unit development to achieve concurrent construction approval. They are also trying to get two PUD relaxations from Sections 18.44.060.D and Section 18.74.020.B of the UDO which is related to the level of service standards for street intersections. The City does not allow a level of service below level D. 570 4 There are some issues at Highland and Kagy that need to be addressed. Planner Sanford stated they would be required to put in a right in, right out at that intersection. Staff is supportive of granting this relaxation because there will only be minimal construction traffic impacts to the current neighborhood using that route. The improvement agreement relaxation is not supported by the Engineering Department and Planning Staff is recommending denial of this relaxation. The applicants are proposing to satisfy their performance points by proposing open space and protecting a small amount of open space in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood. Ms. Sanford noted this proposal wants to transfer development rights out of the Soman property in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood. She stated they would be adding nine lots in locations previously approved for open space in the Knolls property in exchange for the Soman Property. Planner Sanford stated they have received two letters of public comment. One letter is from a New Hyalite View resident which opposed the addition of these lots. The other letter was from GVLT and they had some recommendations. Senior Planner Jody Sanford stated the only two conditions were that the PUD be approved with the relaxation of Kagy and Highland intersection, and the second relaxation be denied. If the Planning Board approves the lots that will be transferred for development rights, she asked they pass on their recommendations about height blockage of the proposed development and the obstruction of view. 0:27:24 [20:08:21] Questions for Staff Ed Sypinski asked Planner Sanford about the TDR itself, he wanted to know if that applies to townhome units or acreage. If it is units, the original plan was much lower than 12 units and asked how that applies to this transfer. She responded Soman Development was initially proposing 12 units, but it was denied. Ms. Sanford noted that Planning Staff is not looking at this in a unit per unit transfer, but as an acre for acre transfer. Brian Caldwell followed up on Mr. Sypinski's thoughts. He wanted to know if the acreage based on the net buildable lot area or the gross acreage. Ms. Sanford stated they are proposing to protect that entire 3.83 acres of the Soman property by the Bozeman Creek. This area is actually larger than the property in the Knolls property. This would leave us with a net gain of open space. Mr. Caldwell ask if the reason why staff is recommending denial of the improvements agreement by the applicant is due to the length of time and relation in dealing with MDT for this area. Ms. Sanford stated that since the applicant will have to go through MDT, they know this will take a long time and the developers do not want to wait that long to get started on this project. Not supporting the relaxation request; we need to treat all developers equally. It was more of an equity issue from the Engineering Department. Ms. Sanford stated that during the review process of the original Knolls project, the applicant did a traffic impact study, but these specifications are not being reviewed in a timely manner. She stated the improvements that need to be made, need to be made for the subdivision. It is important to bring this to the Planning Board because it involves two neighborhood plans and subdivisions. Caren Roberty asked for clarification about concurrent construction. She wanted to know what staff's rationale if for thinking it would be okay to achieve approval at this time. Planner Sanford stated that in this case of concurrent construction, the Hillcrest Group is going to be in charge of overseeing the subdivision improvements, they will be doing all the building themselves and will not be selling individual lots. Ms. Roberty asked if there anything in this proposal that deals with the impact on the neighborhoods. Ms. Sanford replied the applicant cannot receive occupancy permits until all the infrastructure is completed. Therefore, there will not be any residential traffic until the streets are done. 571 5 She closed by stating the City has requirements in place regarding construction routing and cleanliness that will help with these concerns. Bill Quinn stated that in the improvement procedure that allows street improvements, staff is recommending denial of this. He wanted to know the difference between Highland and Kagy infrastructure improvements versus what is considered concurrent construction at the Knolls site. Ms. Sanford the only problem the City has with everything the applicant is proposing to do at this site, is that Staff feels like the plans at Main and Highland could end up bringing drastic changes that MDT would require the Hillcrest Group to add to their plans. Randy Carpenter wanted to make sure the Board is clear on the PUD application because it is somewhat convoluted since it has been eight months since the subdivision was approved. He stated that the applicant should limit the building heights on those nine additional lots that could obstruct the views of the New Hyalite residents or that those nine lots possibly be moved someplace else. Mr. Carpenter asked if there has been any discussion on this subject with the applicant. Planner Sanford stated the applicant is only looking at getting approval from the Planning Board of these modifications to their original subarea plan. She added that the next pre-application process, there is significant reduction in the original density proposed. She closed by stating the Board can make recommendations during the pre-application process. Ms. Sanford stated that this application is only dealing with the modifications to the subarea plan. Suggestions on how to better deal with those nine lots can be addressed during the subdivision pre- application which is the next item to follow. 0:43:26 [20:08:31] Applicant Presentation Jason Leep representing PC Development, the Bozeman Deaconness Health Services Group, and the Soman Development group. He stated this is a unique application. The Edgewood Townhouse project would have left a bad taste in the community's mouth because the townhouses could have been brought forward as a potential legal conflict and the neighborhood was very uncomfortable with the eight proposed units next to the Bozeman Creek. He stated the Manion and Sobrepena family withdrew their prior application in November 2006 and looks forward to the outcome of this application. Mr. Leep stated the Deaconness Group was contacted about a transfer of development rights. He added they are trying to advance the goals of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, trying to get the Manion and Sobrepena Families to realize the value of their property, and Deaconess is trying to proceed with its project through the lengthy MDT process. Mr. Leep stated there are three recipients who benefit in this proposal; the City of Bozeman gets their open space and trail goals advanced, the Soman Group receives the fair market value for their land and improved neighbor relations, and the Bozeman Deaconness Health Services will hopefully get concurrent construction to begin on four model homes. The Soman Group will be placing a deed restriction on their ground so that no development can occur on their property by the Bozeman Creek. Each party is giving to the other. Mr. Leep stated that all they are asking for is to start construction on the four model homes because Deaconness has developed eight floor plans for this area. None of these homes have ever been built before with new designs. They would like to start on these plans to improve the quality of construction in the other homes. He stated the only related traffic will be construction vehicles. There are safeguards in the application during the construction process and they will not interfere with public health and safety. There will be no residential traffic allowed until the improvements are in. He stated the Engineering Department 572 6 recommended denial of the improvements relaxation because they feel that every developer will be asking for this. Mr. Leep noted this proposal is advancing the City's goals in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan which is why it should be approved. Mr. Leep presented his intersection modifications to Highland and Main that were presented to MDT. They have proposed a center left hand turn lane so people going north down highland and are waiting at the signal could turn left at the light as people who wish to make a right onto Main Street can do so at the same time without Highland backing up during peak traffic hours. He closed by noting the wait time at that intersection which is currently five minutes will end up being reduced to thirty seconds. 1:03:55 [20:18:22] Questions for Staff Brian Caldwell asked if the only reason why Highland was created was due to the hospital. Mr. Leep stated he did not know. Director Andy Epple stated there is an old Highland Boulevard that was the old platted boulevard. The decision was made to locate the new Highland Boulevard the way it currently runs. Mr. Leep responded the new Highland Boulevard was made because of the hospital access issues. Mr. Caldwell stated that regarding the transfer of development rights of usable, developable, and buildable land should be more like 1 to 2 acres. He noted there is an additional community benefit because of the current storm water management plan on Sourdough. He just wanted to make sure that they are not running storm water down the hill. Mr. Leep stated there is a current storm drain line that dumps the water directly into the creek. They want to reserve a portion of the Soman's property to install a wetlands storm water treatment area. That way the water gets treated prior to landing into the creek. Caren Roberty asked why they are requesting a relaxation on the financial guarantee with submitted plans instead of approved plans. Mr. Leep replied that with the project sitting in wait for a prolonged period of time to have MDT respond, they could use that time very constructively to try to make the construction process more efficient. It's an opportunity to get something productive done while waiting for the Montana Department of Transportation to do whatever it is they do with their plans since that is the only department that does not have a state mandated timeline by law. If they were like DEQ that has laws that require them to complete their review in 30 days, this situation would not be part of the request. Bill Quinn asked if the TDR location on the Hillcrest property is the only location the developer could determine to put the twelve lots. Mr. Leep responded this is what they could fit into the preplanned areas already taken. Mr. Quinn then asked if they have exhausted all possible ideas. Mr. Leep answered that multifamily lots will not be accepted in the preplanned pods. Ed Sypinski asked what the sizes of the areas would be that Hillcrest is willing to do the transfers on. Mr. Leep stated that they are roughly at 100 to 120,000 square feet total. Randy Carpenter asked why they are going forward with a deed restriction instead of a conservation easement on the Soman's property. Mr. Leep responded they spoke with GVLT and the outcome was the current conservation easement rules do not work well for properties under 10 acres. Mr. Carpenter asked why they did not ask for a PUD when they originally came forward with the subdivision. Mr. Leep stated that at that time, they would not be asking for any relaxations other than concurrent construction like they are now. Mr. Carpenter stated the TDR does have some public benefits, however these are equal lot exchanges given to Soman as what was in the original Edgewood plan. Mr. Leep responded this was a legitimate exchange and Soman gets paid for their ground. 573 7 Ed Sypinski asked how this reduces the number of open space of the subarea plan since those areas being given to Soman were not planned for development. Mr. Leep stated there is no problem with the open space in the subarea plan. There will be over 100 acres of open space and legally, they will easily meet the City's requirements. Randy Carpenter asked if the City is allowed to do a Transfer of Development Rights. Ms. Sanford stated they are not literally proposing to do a TDR because this would be considered a private matter between the two parties. The only thing they need from the Planning Board is to agree to the amendment to the subarea plan. Mr. Carpenter stated that if the City does not want to allow street improvements prior to receipt of plans, what does staff consider to be the downside of this of approving this type of relaxation. Planner Sanford stated that Mr. Leep's assessment of public safety and health issues is accurate because they built enough safegaurds in their proposal. However, Engineering is opposed to this application because it would set a precedent. The City does not feel comfortable with granting exceptions to this rule at this time. Planning Director Andy Epple stated that on the issue of precedent, it is an issue that City Staff is concerned with. However if it does set a precedent for land or a corridor that needs to be protected, he would welcome this opportunity. 1:25:28 [20:33:34] Public Comment Chuck Payton lives at 507 Ice Pond Road and is speaking on behalf of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Advisory Council. He noted their group has discussed this and does support the protection of this Soman area and applaud the parties involved to find a positive outcome. Mr. Payton stated they should be protecting the character of the Bozeman Creek Corridor to preserve that natural area. He stated they support adoption of condition two of the staff report to preserve the open space and also support the exchange of property between the two parties. Mr. Payton noted the neighborhood would like to know how the analysis was done and what values were give to the property. He stated that although this is a private agreement, it could help others in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood as to how they could have a dedicated conservation easement on their property. In conclusion, he stated they are not raising these questions to shoot down this proposal because it is good. We believe it is in the public's best interest to resolve the prior problems. Ed Montos from Bridger Engineers representing Jimmy Pepper. He noted the Pepper family lives just north of the donor property along Bozeman Creek. The Peppers live at 1322 South Rouse and have approximately 3 acres just north of the Soman properties. The Peppers want to say they fully support what is going on here in order to support the Bozeman Creek Corridor, but they have three concerns. One of them is that even though this is not a TDR program, it is the start of the City of Bozeman doing similar things like this and they just want to make sure there is some process where they can participate in case they want to do a conservation easement on their property. Mr. Montos stated the Pepper Family does not want this to reduce their property value. In closing, he stated whatever procedure is done, the City needs to think about the next participants involved with this type of transaction. They, the Pepper family, just want a mechanism in place so other property owners along the corridors can participate. Steven Johnson, on behalf of GVLT stated the two prior speakers spoke eloquently about their support for this. GVLT supports the creativity and initiative of this proposal and is in support of it as well. They would like to see the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan advanced. Mr. Johnson stated they do have a concern for the precedent, but do not see a problem with the change in density of the subarea plan. They are requesting this proposal move forward. 574 8 Noah Poritz lives at 1418 Maple Drive. He stated he feels this might be a direct impact to his home. He opposes the TDR because if you look at the significant changes in the Bozeman Creek property and the equity of the Hillcrest property. The benefit analysis does include the costs and impacts to the New Hyalite View residents. Mr. Poritz stated that to put nine homes directly across from a park which happens to be native ground with native brush would not be appropriate. He noted that the fact the applicant did not notify any of the residents of the Hyalite View Subdivision because they were not required to really speaks to the character of the developer. Had we been formally notified other than the announcement in the paper, we would be hearing more voices on this subject who would be opposed. In closing, Mr. Poritz suggested that the Planning Board reject this proposal. Bart Manion lives at 425 East Lincoln Street stated that the comments made by Andy Epple summed this up perfectly because this does set a precedent. It shows we can come up with a remedy to a real problem. They have tried three application processes to develop the Soman Property of which all were denied. This is an agreeable outcome. Both Mr. Leep and Director Epple were the ones who proposed this to the Soman group since we had so many issues with the prior three applications. Mr. Manion stated he'd be glad to answer the questions from the Bozeman Creek group and the surrounding neighbors. He would be happy to share all his information and be more than happy to help them if they want to do this. For five years, they have been trying to develop our property and for once, we have come to a positive result. Scott Creel lives at 1430 Cherry Drive in the New Hyalite View subdivision. He stated there is a lot to like and dislike in this proposal. A year ago, when they were discussing the plan, the room was full of people. Mr. Creek stated that twelve lots does not seem like a lot of new homes, but some of these lots are directly adjacent to the Hyalite View property. So there has been a huge compromise made and he feels the details are what matters. He is not opposed to putting twelve lots in the Hillcrest area, but would like them to be put somewhere else because of the adjacent park. There is a trail running through that park area and directly through the proposed 12 lots that is highly used. This would not be a great use of that area and is not in support of this application. KC Cassidy lives at 1316 South Rouse stated she is excited about the TDR. She stated this is a precedent setting situation of which everyone would benefit. Ms. Cassidy stated there has been such a good effort on the part of PC Development and the Manions to have an amicable outcome and would not like to see policy roadblocks. She will be supporting this application. 1:51:34 [20:56:13] Discussion Brian Caldwell noted that this precedent in the transfer of development rights, it is important to recognize the watercourse areas, setbacks, and floodplains. On a good day, there is only an acre and a half of good buildable property on the Manion property and feels that the transfer to 3 acres is an over value. Mr. Caldwell stated that this is something we should be supporting. He would strongly suggest the board should reduce the transfer of ground by half. As far as the public benefit, this is most certainly something we should support. Mr. Jason Leep stated that reason they came to a result of 12 lots, this was the calculation of buildable area zoned R2. While they are looking at gross acreage versus gross acreage, however the zoning of the Soman Property is what caused the number of 12 lots. Mr. Caldwell noted they need to not look at this transfer from a unit standpoint, but square footage of buildable space. The issue that MDT is going to pull some magic expense out of their hat will not likely happen. He added that Mr. Leep does have safeguards in their proposal to make sure that improvements are made. Mr. Caldwell noted the overall approval of this PUD are very much worth supporting, but the issue 575 9 of the TDR and red areas need to be equivalent. Ed Sypinski stated his concern is not about the land value, but the location of the TDR's. He noted he is afraid they are putting two neighborhoods against each other. They can look at a conditional use as to where the development can take place. He is supportive that the new construction could occur on Kagy intead of next to the New Hyalite residences. Mr. Sypinski agrees that the TDR is good first step in the process. They could, however, relocate these nine units and distribute them amongst this development. With the relaxations, he disagrees because during the subarea plan, the Planning Board agreed that a traffic impact study had to be done. Therefore, Mr. Sypinski stated he can approve this conditionally if they take out some of the recommendations of this PUD. Caren Roberty stated she does not want to vote against this application because she agrees that the Bozeman Creek Corridor area needs to be preserved. The TDR lots adjacent to the Painted Hills Road across from the park will have significant aesthetic impacts, eliminate usable open space, and will have driveways crossings to a shared used path. She stated this is a lot to deal with at this stage of the process. Ms. Roberty stated there has to be another place to put these units. She would like to make a recommendation reflecting this. There is a way to tailor this project to meet everyone's needs. Concurrent development will not hurt anything and does not have a problem with the financial guarantees. Bill Quinn stated that the board is considering two proposals. If they vote to approve this, are they voting to approve the locations in the preliminary plat. Ms. Sanford noted that the pre-application is an informal review, but if the board approves this application with the change in the subarea plan, they are saying they can have those twelve lots in that particular area in that application. If it is declined by the board, they would be required to remove those lots. She noted they could state they are okay with squeezing in those extra lots, but perhaps find another location. Mr. Caldwell stated he is hopeful there is a greater exchange than just wanting to get construction started early. Bill Quinn stated that in that regard, he is very much in favor of protecting that Bozeman Creek area and is in favor of the concurrent construction since we have a financial guarantee. Mr. Quinn noted the only issue he has is the location of where the TDR's are going to end up. Mr. Caldwell stated the board to recommend approval of this application, but put a condition that the exchange be 1 and 1/2 acres instead of 3 acres. This would help address the issues raised by adjacent property owners. Mr. Sypinski stated the Planning Board is only allowed to recommend approval of the modifications to the plan and they cannot approve the TDR because that is a private matter. Director Epple stated that the TDR is a private negotiation between two property owners. If the board is comfortable with two out of the three major aspects of this project; the protection of land in the Bozeman Creek Corridor and the concurrent construction. However, the problem is where the receiving areas of the TDR are that were originally planned for open space. Mr. Epple stated there are two times they will be able to address this issue because of this application, modifications to the original plan, and the next agenda item where the informal subdivision pre-application will be discussed. Chair Pro Tempore, Mr. Carpenter agreed with the rest of the board. They can vote to approve the concurrent construction, approve the TDR to preserve the Bozeman Creek Corridor, but they can put a condition on the location of those lots by coming up with new ideas of where they can put these lots. Mr. Carpenter noted that if the board were to support this, he would hope they are not entitling the applicant to having these lots in the locations they are currently in. He could approve this with the 576 10 9 lots to the north of Hyalite View being reduced and building height restricted. They can deal with this portion of the issue during the next agenda item. 2:17:00 [21:17:19] Motion and Vote Brian Caldwell stated it is important to note the land will have to come from somewhere. It will come from what is shown as open space on this plan. His motion will speak specifically to the amount of TDR, to be addressed in acreage and not unit. In addition to this, he will give a favorable opinion of the other conditions. Brian Caldwell moved to recommend approval of the CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 amended that the receiving area be reduced by 1.5 acres along Painted Hills Road as well as recommending approval the relaxations as proposed by the applicant. The motion was seconded by Bill Quinn. Mr. Carpenter asked for discussion on the motion. Mr. Sypinski stated he has trouble with the amended transferrable acres. He noted the board has no authority to do that. Ms. Roberty stated the board is only making a recommendation. Those in favor of Mr. Caldwell’s motion being Brian Caldwell, Bill Quinn, and Caren Roberty. Those against being Ed Sypinski and Randy Carpenter. The motion failed. Ed Sypinski moved to approve the CUP/PUD Application of #P-07007 as conditioned by staff and with the added condition that the nine units proposed along Painted Hills Road be removed to an area designated for development and to reduce lot sizes. The motion was seconded by Caren Roberty. Those in favor being Caren Roberty, Bill Quinn, and Ed Sypinski. Those against being Brian Caldwell and Randy Carpenter. The motion failed. Randy Carpenter recommend approval of CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 as conditioned by staff and the added condition of the Planning Board and City Commission to consider reducing the building height of the new lots along Painted Hills Road be limited to 24 feet. The motion was seconded by Ed Sypinski. Mr. Carpenter stated he believes the board can address the issues in the pre-application that is coming up next with the motion given. With the recommended conditions of approval by staff and with the new condition to restrict the building height on the newly added lots, Mr. Carpenter stated they can better address the pre-application of the subdivision next. Mr. Caldwell stated the conditions approved are not clear in the relaxations requested by the applicant in the recent motion. Mr. Carpenter stated he wishes to amend his previous motion and moved to recommend approval of CUP/PUD Application #P-07007 to allow street improvements to be financially guaranteed based on submitted plans instead of approved plans. Those in favor being Caren Roberty, Bill Quinn, Randy Carpenter, and Brian Caldwell. Those against being Ed Sypinski. The motion failed. Senior Planner Jody Sanford stated the Planning Board does not have to make an official recommendation. She further noted that not every board member is present tonight to help give additional input. This project is going before the City Commission without a formal recommendation from the Planning Board. 4. Subdivision Pre-Application #P-07002 (The Knolls East and Highland South) - A Major Subdivision Pre-Application on behalf of Bozeman Deaconess Health Services to allow the subdivision of 216.95 acres into 374 single household lots, 2 attached 577 11 Mr. Leep noted he does want to ensure the Planning Board that there will be an excellent trail in this proposal. There will be two improved park areas on each end and then a long linear park in between. He added the park is natural ground, it is not a "park". It is intended to be a controlled access park that includes parking and restrooms. They are okay with most of the conditions outlined by staff except single household lots, 1 multi-household lot, and 1 mixed use lot for a total of 460 dwelling units on property located east of Highland Boulevard and the New Hyalite View Subdivision. The property is annexed with a zoning designation of R-1 (Residential Single Household, Low Density District) and R-S (Residential Suburban District). (Sanford) 2:29:40 [22:09:58] Staff Report Senior Planner Jody Sanford gave the staff report. She stated there are a variety of residential zones and possibly some B2 in this informal application. This property totals 216.95 acres in size. The applicant will dedicate 60 acres for a public park. She noted the applicant would also set aside approximately 37 acres for dedicated public open space. Ms. Sanford noted they are creating 5 single household lots for affordable housing. The total dwelling units will be 460. She noted this pre-application has considerable less density than the subarea plan, but this is due to the topography. The UDO requires they have 6 units per acre and Planning Staff found that they would only have about 5 1/2 units per acre. They will need to do a PUD to relax that standard or find a way to put more housing units here to meet the approved subarea plan. Senior Planner Sanford stated the UDO requires the applicant have 100% street frontage along city parks, and it could never be less than 50% street frontage. This proposal does not meet the 50% criteria. She noted that Planning Staff is recommending that they have street frontage along the proposed park. The Parks and Recreation advisory board also made the same finding. She noted that the lots that were approved for open space are being encroached upon on the east and west sides. Staff would like to see more connectivity along the east and west sides of Painted Hills Road. The lots proposed on Painted Hills bring some safety concerns to the Planning Department. She stated there are an awful lot of driveways facing that busy street and a better plan would to have those lots accessed by installing an alley and it would give more visual appeal. If the applicant cannot install an alley, those developments would need to have a shared driveway. Ms. Sanford stated the Affordable Housing Board reviewed this and CAHAB suggested the RSL's be scattered throughout this development instead of in one localized area. The comments were received from the Bridger Ski Foundation, GVLT, and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. 2:39:34 [22:22:12] Questions for Staff Ed Sypinski stated that on the Preliminary Plat Application, it is clearly noted where the 9 TDR lots will be located. However on this application, it is not clear and he asked if there is an indicator on this application of where the alternative location would be for these lots. Planner Sanford stated it is hard to tell and Mr. Leep stated it is too early to tell. She was only able to indicate the general area of their locations. 2:40:35 [22:22:26] Applicant Presentation Jason Leep representing PC Development and the Deaconness Group. He stated the trails and the nature of the community park are two large issues that are going to have to be resolved. The trail on the subarea plan is general in nature and not intended to show trail configuration. 578 21 Brian Caldwell commented this plan shows the skill taken and is a better proposed plan that what was presented to planning staff originally. He added this land was already given to the hospital for future lining park space with a road because of the steep grade next to it. The 9 lot TDR area is part of the original open space plan. Mr. Leep stated they are 64 residential lots short of what was approved in the subarea plan. He noted they feel it is not right to cram those 64 extra lots into this plan. There is a total of 58 affordable housing units in this plan to include some rental lots. This project is split into five phases. Mr. Leep noted the affordable housing plan eliminates the Restricted Size Lots. Jason Leep commented they have added additional road connection between the pods and met the intent of pedestrian pass through with this design. The pedestrian corridors are aligned with streets and they are going to put in a Nordic Ski Trail System. There is a new lot configuration that allows for trail corridor widening that intertwine with the pods. He noted they now have access onto Kagy and added alleyways which will allow for garage access. Mr. Leep closed by stating they are not in the position to try and get road frontage along the park because of access control and added this park is not Cooper Park because it is a natural park, but agrees with staff on all the other issues. 2:53:40 [22:33:05] Questions for Staff Caren Roberty asked Mr. Leep if they added the connections to the streets specified by Planner Sanford. He responded they did comply with her direction in two spots. 2:54:41 [22:33:58] Public Comment Ted Lange representing GVLT stated his firm has enjoyed working with PC Development and the Bozeman Deaconess Group. He noted the biggest problem, in that area along the park land, it that there is a 50 degree drop along some of those areas so there was no choice but to move the homes up another 25 feet. That 'Rim Trail' is gone, there is no Rim Trail at its specified site because it is completely gone and the lots extend completely to the slope. There is no way one could build a trail there. This does however provide for a great Nordic Track for the City of Bozeman. Mr. Lange noted this new plan looks like significant improvements were made overall. His biggest concern is the lots along Rim Trail. He closed by stating the jury is out on the nine TDR lots. Noah Poritz lives at 1418 Maple Drive and noted that if the board looks at the original adopted subarea plan, there is a different street alignment now. He stated he does not want a road that shines headlights right into his living room window. Mr. Poritz stated if they could change that, the New Hyalite View residents do not become victims to light pollution. Scott Creel lives at 1430 Cherry Drive. He noted he keeps hearing "we can change this later". He is aware that they are not approving anything at this time. However, a decision is being made. Mr. Creel stated the UDO says that PUD's must keep to the existing character of the adjacent neighborhoods. He encouraged the board to not get lost in the details and compare it to the existing neighborhoods that this is adjacent to. Even though the changes are individually small, they all add up in the end. Mr. Creel stated he understands the city wants to get six units per acre, the City has some obligations to meet in considering the neighborhood right next to this property. 3:05:31 [22:47:24] Discussion Ed Sypinski stated he appreciates the responsiveness that Mr. Leep and the Deaconness Group have shown in the master plan. He also appreciates comments from the adjacent neighborhoods to keep the board on track. 579 13 development for the City. Mr. Caldwell closed by stating the nine TDR lots that are added are in his opinion, not necessary. Randy Carpenter noted he these changes are appreciated and are good ideas. He likes the numerous park lands in this plan. Mr. Carpenter closed by stating we need a better regulation on street frontage in regards to parks. This particular park in question does not need street frontage. 3:07:58 [22:48:34] ITEM 5. ADJOURNMENT Ed Sypinski motioned to adjourn the Planning Board meeting, seconded by Randy Carpenter and Brian Caldwell. All in favor, the meeting was adjourned at 11:04 PM. _____________________________________ __________________________________ Randy Carpenter, Chair Pro Tempore Andrew C. Epple, Director Planning Board Dept. of Planning & Community Dev. City of Bozeman City of Bozeman *City of Bozeman Planning Board meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a special need or disability, please contact our ADA Coordinator, Ron Brey, at 582-2306 (voice) or 582-2301 (TDD). 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 Baxter Meadows Subdivision, P.U.D. Preliminary Plat Application for a Minor Subdivision Prepared: January, 2007 602 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION DESCRIPTION TAB # Development Review Application........................1 Pre-Plat Checklist ....................................1 Pre-Plat Checklist Narrative ............................1 Preliminary Plat (11x17)...............................2 Existing Topography (11x17)...........................2 Vicinity Map ........................................3 Land Use Concept Plan ................................3 Zoning - Current and Proposed ..........................4 Weed Control Plan....................................5 Preliminary Platting Certificate..........................6 Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements ........7 Surface Water; Floodplains; Groundwater; Geology, Soils & Slope; Vegetation; Wildlife; Historical Features; Agriculture; Agriculture Water User Facilities; Water & Sewer; Stormwater Management; Streets, Roads & Alleys; Utilities; Educational Facilities; Land Use; Parks & Recreational Facilities; Neighborhood Center Plan; Lighting Plan; and Miscellaneous. Adjoiners List and Certificate ...........................8 Preliminary Plat (24x36)...............................9 Existing Topography (24x36)...........................9 603 BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat Application January 2007 Preliminary Plat Application Checklist Narrative D. Preliminary Plat Requirements 1. All information required with the pre-application plan, as outlined in Section 18.78.030 (Subdivision Preapplication Plan), BMC. See all included drawings. 2. Name and location of the subdivision, scale, scale bar, north arrow, date of preparation, lots and blocks (designated by number), the dimensions and area of each lot, and the use of each lot, if other than for single family. See information on plat exhibit. 3. All streets, roads, alleys, avenues, highways, and easements; the width of the right-of-way, grades, and curvature of each; existing and proposed road and street names; and proposed location of intersections for any subdivision requiring street access to arterial or collector highways. See information on plat exhibit. 4. The names of adjoining platted subdivisions and numbers of adjoining certificates of survey. See information on plat exhibit. 5. An approximate survey of the exterior boundaries of the platted tract with bearings, distances, and curve data indicated outside of the boundary lines. When the plat is bounded by an irregular shoreline or a body of water, the bearings and distances of a closing meander traverse shall be given. See information on plat exhibit. 6. The approximate location of all section corners or legal subdivision corners of sections pertinent to the subdivision boundary. See information on plat exhibit. 7. If the improvements required are to be completed in phases after the final plat is filed, the approximate area of each phase shall be shown on the plat. N/A 8. Ground contours at 2-foot intervals if slope is under 10 percent; 5-foot intervals if the slope is between 10 and 15 percent; and 10-foot intervals if slope is 15 percent or greater. See information on site survey. 604 9. List of waivers granted from the requirements of Section 18.78.060 (Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements), BMC during the preapplication process. None granted. 10. Request for exemption from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality Review as described in Section 18.78.040.K (Request for exemption from MDEQ Review), BMC. N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be constructed until it has undergone futher review. 11. All appropriate certificates (refer to Chapter 18.12, BMC). See information on plat exhibit. E. Preliminary Plat Supplements Required for All Subdivisions 1. A map showing all adjacent sections of land, subdivision, certificates of survey, streets and roads See vicinity map, and preliminary plat. 2. Map of entire subdivision on either an 8.5-inch x 11-inch, 8.5-inch x 14-inch, or 11-inch x 17-inch sheet See information on plat exhibit. 3. A written statement describing any requested subdivision variance(s) and the facts of hardship upon which the request is based. Refer to Chapter 18.66 (Variance, Deviation, and Appeal Procedures), BMC. No variances requested. 4. Covenants, Restrictions, and Articles of Incorporation for the Property Owners’ Association. N/A – No POA will be formed until the subdivision undergoes futher review. 5. Encroachment permits or a letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new streets, easements, rights-of-way or driveways intersect State, County, or City highways, streets or roads. N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be constructed until it has undergone futher review. 7. A letter of approval or preliminary approval from the City of Bozeman where a zoning change is necessary. Please see Tab 4. 8. A draft of such other appropriate certificates. N/A 605 9. Provision for maintenance of all streets (including emergency access), parks, and other required improvements if not dedicated to the public or if private. N/A – No improvements associated with this minor subdivision will be constructed until it has undergone futher review. 10. Profile sheets for street grades greater than 5 percent. N/A 11. If an authorized representative signs on behalf of an owner of record, a copy of the authorization shall be provided. N/A 12. A Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed Control District for control of noxious weeds. See approved Weed Control Plan. 13. A preliminary platting certificate prepared by a Montana title company. See included preliminary platting certificate. F. Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements 1. Surface Water. Tab 7 2. Floodplains. Tab 7 3. Groundwater. Tab 7 4. Geology, soils and slope. Tab 7 5. Vegetation. Tab 7 6. Wildlife. Tab 7 7. Historical features. Tab 7 8. Agriculture. Tab 7 9. Agriculture water user facilities. Tab 7 10. Water and sewer. N/A 11. Stormwater management. N/A 12. Streets, roads and alleys. N/A 13. Utilities. N/A 606 14. Educational Facilities. N/A 15. Land Use. N/A 16. Parks and recreation facilities. N/A 17. Neighborhood center plan. N/A 18. Lighting plan. N/A 19. Miscellaneous. N/A 20. Additional relevant and reasonable information. N/A 607 608 609 610 611 612 BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat Application January 2007 Zoning The zoning of this minor subdivision will be B-2 and R-3 prior to submitting the Final Plat. Portions of Lots 3 & 4, south of Baxter Lane, currently are zoned PLI, as a result of the boundary adjustment between this property and the Gallatin County Regional Park. A zone map amendment application has been submitted concurrently with this preliminary plat application. An exhibit showing details of the zone change is shown on the following page. 613 Total increase in useable (non-ROW) PLI: 1.06 Total decrease in useable (non-ROW) R-3: -0.22 Total net change in zoning acreage - PLI to R-3: 3.01 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat Application January 2007 Adjoiners List Physically Contiguous: Cascade Development, Inc. c/o Wayne Jennings 125 W. Mendenhall St. Bozeman, MT 59715-3586 WBC LP AD% Baxter Meadows Development 6780 Trade Center Ave. Billings, MT 59101-6294 William R. & Dianne Peterson 5001 Baxter Ln. East Bozeman, MT 59718-9797 Gallatin County 311 W. Main St. Bozeman, MT 59715-4594 Ben W. & Diane E. Rogers 6724 Davis Lane Bozeman, MT 59718-8865 Within 200 ft: Cecilia K. Reiner 106 Erik Dr. Bozeman, MT 59715-6633 Warbler Development, LLC P.O.Box 10968 Bozeman, MT 59719-0968 Carolyn M. Nistler 48 Crescent Point Bozeman, MT 59715 625 626 APPENDIX A UPDATED BAXTER MEADOWS WETLANDS IMPACT/MITIGATION MAP CURRENT U.S.A.C.E. 404 WETLANDS PERMIT ORIGINAL WETLANDS STUDY - JUNE 2000 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 APPENDIX B 310 PERMIT - GALLATIN CONSERVATION DISTRICT 656 657 658 659 APPENDIX C NRCS SOILS INFORMATION 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 APPENDIX D GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA 695 696 697 698 APPENDIX E VEGETATION MAP 699 700 APPENDIX F SOILS REPORT 701 MEMORANDUM TO: Neil Poulsen Building Inspection Department FROM: Harley Huestis Project Manager DATE: July 31, 2006 RE: Baxter Meadows Soils Report Please find attached the soils report for Baxter Meadows. The report was done by SK Geotechnical and Peccia Engineering, and included 37 test bores. The report concludes that there are three categories of soil types anticipated at the footing level (4’ deep) – undisturbed gravel, undisturbed clay, and soft alluvial clays, which should be subexcavated and backfilled. The report also discusses the presence of groundwater. The entire report including all bore logs is included. 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 APPENDIX G STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION SOCIETY LETTER 749 750 BAXTER MEADOWS SUBDIVISION, P.U.D. – MINOR SUBDIVISION Preliminary Plat Application January 2007 Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements (Per Section 18.78.060 of U.D.O.) Contents: 1 - A. Surface Water 2 - B. Floodplains 3 - C. Groundwater 4 - D. Geology; soils and slope 5 - E. Vegetation 6 - F. Wildlife 7 - G. Historical features 8 - H. Agriculture 9 - I. Agriculture water user facilities 10 - J. Water and sewer 11 - K. Stormwater management 12 - L. Streets, roads and alleys 13 - M. Utilities 14 - N. Educational facilities 15 - O. Land use 16 - P. Parks and recreation facilities 17 - Q. Neighborhood center plan 18 - R. Lighting plan 19 - S. Miscellaneous Appendix: A. - Updated Baxter Meadows Wetlands Impact/Mitigation Map - Current U.S.A.C.E. 404 Wetlands Permit - Original Wetlands Study – June 2000 B. 310 Permit – Gallatin Conservation District C. NRCS Soils Information D. Groundwater Monitoring Data E. Vegetation Map F. Soils Report G. State Historic Preservation Society Letter The information contained herein borrows from the “Environmental Assessment, Community Impact Report and Flood Hazard Evaluation for Baxter Meadows Subdivision”, prepared by Wetlands West, Robert Peccia & Associates, and Mithun Inc., Oct. 17, 2001 751 A. Surface Water The property, commonly known as Baxter Meadows Minor Subdivision, is approximately 4,700 feet above sea level, encompassing 167 acres that slope gradually from south to north as is characteristic of the Gallatin Valley. The historic and current land use is agricultural, primarily hay and crop production. The property has been leased by a dairy operation for approximately 50 years. One surface waterway, the Spring Ditch, traverses the property, flowing in a south to north direction. Waterways in the greater Bozeman area have been mapped and classified as streams, stream/ditch combinations, or ditches by the Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks (FWP) on the 1993 AStreams and Ditches@ map. Stream/ditches are typically naturally occurring streams that have been historically channelized for irrigation purposes. Ditches convey water only during the irrigation season and are dry otherwise. According to the FWP system, Spring ditch is classified as a stream/ditch. The Spring ditch (Stream/ditch): The original source of this waterway was apparently a natural spring located at the south property boundary (i.e., within the Regional Park). Currently the water is collected underground (presumably via a french drain system) and discharged to a pipe placed in the bottom of the man-made channel. The channel flows north from the southeast section of the property, crosses Baxter Lane, then flows into a wetland (W-1) located on the north property boundary. Water Body Alteration Approximately one thousand feet of the Spring Ditch is planned to be rebuilt, similar to the section of Baxter-Border Ditch that has already been rebuilt in Phase 3. This will allow for expansion of the wetlands, and make the stream more wildlife- friendly and aesthetically pleasing. A 310 permit from the Gallatin Conservation District has been obtained and is included under Appendix B. Wetlands The existing wetlands are shown on the preliminary plat. They are also further described in the delineation report in Appendix A. In regard to the entire project site (original Baxter Meadows property boundary) progress has been made to mitigate for the unavoidable wetland losses. As of October, 2005 greater than 3 acres of wetlands have been created or enhanced or 80% of the required total mitigation acreage. North of Baxter Lane the wetlands adjacent to the Spring Ditch have been enhanced (planted with shrubs) and in approximately half of that distance the wetlands along the stream were expanded. The large emergent/shrub wetland in the northeast corner of the property has been expanded and planted with trees, shrubs, and emergent wetland seed and plugs (sedge, rush and bulrush species). The emergent wetland bench around the circumference of Kendeda Lake south of Baxter 752 Lane was finished during the spring of 2005; wetland trees, shrubs, and emergent plugs were planted at that time. In July, 2005 the COE visited the entire project site to check progress toward the mitigation goals. The COE was very satisfied with the mitigation areas and progress. B. Floodplains There do not appear to be any portions of the subdivision that are within two thousand horizontal feet and less than twenty vertical feet of a watercourse draining an area of twenty-five square miles or more. No official floodplain delineation study has been made for the ditches in this area. The watercourses that cross the proposed subdivision are man controlled irrigation ditches and serve to collect groundwater and spring discharge. C. Groundwater [The information in this section is taken from a groundwater study of the entire Baxter Meadows P.U.D. project done in 2000-2001. We do not expect a substantial change in groundwater conditions since that time. Furthermore, groundwater degradation is not expected due to the use of City of Bozeman public water and sewer systems.] Water-bearing materials in the area are predominantly quaternary and tertiary alluvial fan deposits. Groundwater flows in a north-northwest direction, roughly paralleling the slope of the ground surface (USGS 1995). Eighteen (18) monitoring wells were installed at the site in May and June of 2000 to measure groundwater levels for design and construction purposes. Three nested piezometers were subsequently installed in September to more accurately characterize groundwater depths in the general location of the proposed ponds (Regional Park). Monitoring well and piezometer locations are shown on the map included in Appendix D. Static water levels were measured once in May/June and again in August. Beginning in September 2000, groundwater levels have been, and will continue to be, measured every two to three weeks until July 2001. The monitoring frequency may be reduced from December through March once the levels stabilize. Static water level readings measured from May through November are also included in Appendix D. The highest groundwater level was measured at 1.6 inches below ground surface (bgs) in MW-27 on October 17th. This well is located in the south central portion of Section 3. (*This reading was taken where the ponds are now). Current data indicates that static water levels (SWLs) within the subdivision development range from less than one foot bgs in the south portion of the property (Section 3) to 9.5 feet bgs in the north portion (Section 34). Water features for the development, such as the ponds, will be designed to take into account existing groundwater levels. 753 Well logs from residential wells indicate well depths ranging from 40 to 72 feet and static water levels from 6 to 14 feet. The lithologic logs identified a silt loam topsoil layer extending from 0 to 3 feet followed by alternating layers of sand and cobbles to 72 feet with intermittent narrow lenses of clay. Production rates measured in surrounding residential, fire protection, and irrigation wells ranged from 5 to 1000 gpm. Steps to Avoid Degradation: No improvements will be installed in conjunction with the platting of this minor subdivision. However, the water system for future development of the subdivision will be constructed to Montana Department of Environmental Quality and City of Bozeman standards, and water will be supplied by the City. Irrigation wells will be drilled for open space areas, in order to ease the demand on treated water. Records from existing wells in the area indicate that the aquifer is capable of providing sufficient water quality and quantity for irrigation needs. Again, for future development, wastewater will be collected in a system constructed to MDEQ and City of Bozeman standards. The system will connect to the City=s existing system, and the wastewater will be piped to the City=s treatment facility. D. Geology – Soils – Slopes Geologic Hazards There are no known geologic hazards or areas of instability within or adjacent to the proposed subdivision site. The entire Gallatin Valley is classified as a Seismic Zone 3. Zone 0 has the least earthquake potential, Zone 4 has the greatest potential. Protective Measures All new utilities will be buried, reducing the risk of property damage or personal injury in the event of an earthquake. Buildings will be designed to withstand Seismic Zone 3 earthquake loadings, in accordance with applicable regulations. Unusual Features No significant or unusual geologic features are evident on the property. The landform is an alluvial deposit typical of the north side of Bozeman, featuring deep soils and variable depths to sand and gravels. Slopes range from 0% to 4% (NRCS 2000). The property does exhibit high groundwater levels and isolated layers of impermeable clay. Engineering measures that will be taken to overcome potential limitations are discussed in the soils report – Appendix F. 754 Soils Soil characteristics and a Gallatin County Soil Survey map of the site were obtained from NRCS (Appendix C). Ten map units were identified within the project area. Map units with hydric components and/or inclusions are: Threeriv-Bonebasin loams (NRCS soil type 556A), Blossberg loam (542A), Enbar loam (509B), and Meadowcreek loam (510B). Non-hydric soils were identified as Amsterdam silt loam (53B), Blackdog silt loam (50B), Amsterdam-Quagle silt loam (453C), Quagle-Brodyk silt loam (451C), Turner loam (457A), and Danvers-Quagle complex (458C). The Enbar, Threeriv, Bonebasin, Blossberg, Meadowcreek, Turner and Danvers soil types were identified as having severe limitations for septic system absorption fields as a result of wetness, slow percolation, and/or poor filtering. The remaining soil types exhibited moderate limitations. Limitations for building site development were listed as severe for the Enbar, Bonebasin, Blossberg, Meadowcreek, Turner and Danvers soil types as a result of wetness, caving on cut slopes, flooding, and/or shrink/swell potential. These soil types also had severe limitations for local roads and streets as a result of the potential for frost action. Building site and road construction limitations on the remaining soils were rated as slight to moderate. Design Methods to Overcome Limitations Again, no improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. However, for future development… A geotechnical evaluation has been completed site-wide to identify potential soil limitations. (Please see report by SK Geotechnical and Peccia Engineering dated October 19, 2001, included in Appendix F). Building foundations and footings will be constructed to account for soil limitations and high groundwater conditions. Where necessary, topsoil layers containing clay will be over-excavated and replaced with structural fill. Typical cross-sections of the roadway will be designed to account for site- specific soil types. Site buildings and residences will not be constructed with basements to accommodate high groundwater conditions, unless approved by an engineer Cuts and Fills Due to the flat topography of the site, areas of excessive cuts and fills are not anticipated. If they become necessary, approprate erosion control measures and storm water runoff mitigation measures will be taken. 755 E. Vegetation Vegetation Map Major vegetation types are depicted on the map in Appendix E. The acreages and type of crop and grazing land have been approximated (pers. commun. Tom Kingma). The site has historically been hay and barley, but is now dormant. Major vegetation types There are four major vegetation categories within the Baxter Meadows property: cropland (historically barley, alfalfa hay, and mixed-grass species hay), grazing land (mixed grass species), emergent/shrub marsh (Carex spp.), and riparian stream corridors. Cultivated crops within the property include barley and alfalfa. Grazing lands are comprised of a variety of grass species, including fescue (Festuca spp.), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), timothy (Phleum pratense), foxtail (Hordeum jubatum), and bluegrass (Poa spp.). These species are excellent forage grasses, widespread in the Gallatin Valley where moisture is sufficient or supplemental irrigation is available. The riparian stream corridors have been channelized for irrigation and heavily impacted by unrestricted cattle grazing. Although species diversity is low, the majority of species are native and include wild celery, beaked sedge, and a few black cottonwood trees. Broad-leafed cattail (Typha latifolia) inhabits the borrow ditches along Baxter Lane. Critical plant communities The Natural Heritage Program was contacted for information on species of concern in the vicinity of Section 3, T2S, R5E and Section 34, T1S, R5E. A survey of the Program=s databases identified reports for three plant species of concern. The reports are the result of a search for species of concern and communities that occur in the area defined by the legal description with an additional one-mile buffer surrounding the requested area. The first plant species of concern listed is dwarf purple monkeyflower (Mimulus nanus) observed last in 1894 in Section 34. The location accuracy for this siting is within a five mile radius. The species is considered critically imperiled in Montana because of extreme rarity. According to the Vascular Plants of West-Central Montana Identification Guidebook (USDA 1991), the dwarf monkeyflower has been found in the Montana region only on a dry gravelly slope above Sheephead Creek in the southern Bitterroot Mountains. These habitat conditions do not currently exist within the property boundaries. The project site consists of primarily level cultivated crop and pasture land with no areas of gravel exposed on the ground surface. The species was not observed during the onsite survey conducted as part of the wetland delineation. 756 The second plant species identified is slender wedgegrass (Spenopholis intermedia), a state critically imperiled species last observed in 1926 in Section 2 of T2S, R5E. This short-lived perennial grass has been found in wet areas of valleys and foothills, specifically the Gallatin River valley. This species has not been observed in this region in recent history. The last known observation occurred at a site greater than one-half mile outside the project boundaries. Its presence would not be expected on the project site. Small dropseed (Sporobolus neglectus) is an annual grass that is possibly imperiled but whose status is uncertain. It was last observed in this region in 1927 at the Montana State University (MSU) Bozeman Experiment Station Farm located in the SE 3 of Section 14, T2S, R5E. It is typically found in grasslands of the valleys and plains in both natural and disturbed habitats although it was likely planted in this region as part of the Station=s widespread cultivation of native species. The MSU Experiment Station is located approximately two miles from the project. The presence of this species would not be expected within the property boundaries. Noxious Weeds Canada thistle (Circium arvensis, Category I), houndstongue (Cynoglossum officinale, Category I), musk thistle (Carduus nutans, Category IV), and poison hemlock (Conium maculatum, Category IV) were observed within the project site. A Gallatin County Weed Management Plan was approved by the county on May 16, 2002, and is included in Tab 5. Protective Measures For now, no improvements are being constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. However, future development plans call for several measures to ensure that vegetation is preserved or enhanced. The stream corridor will be enhanced/restored to create a more natural and diverse vegetation community with a riparian floodplain consisting of emergents, shrubs, and trees. Setbacks of 50’ from either edge of the wetlands will be utilized to protect the waterway. Portions of the development will be preserved as open space. F. Wildlife Species As a result of the heavy agricultural use and openess of cropland, few signs of wildlife were observed within the project boundaries. Surrounding properties are frequented by white-tailed deer, skunk, muskrat, and raccoon. A red-tailed hawk was observed in the cottonwoods along the Spring ditch and common snipe were seen in the emergent/shrub marsh. Neotropical migrant bird species within the area include bobolinks, yellow warblers, song sparrows, and tree swallows. The diversity of birds is limited by the lack of tree and shrub species within the property. Fish species in area 757 waterways are expected to include brown and brook trout, although an onsite survey was not conducted. Critical Areas The Natural Heritage Program was contacted for information on species of concern in the project vicinity. The Program=s survey identified one animal species of concern in Section 31 of T1S and R6E at the MSU Experiment Station. The status of the stonefly (Isocapnia crinita) is considered imperiled in Montana because of rarity. No information was given on the date of the last observation or preferred habitat. The Experiment Station is located over two miles from the project area. Protective Measures Wildlife habitat and protection will be enhanced through the creation of open space areas consisting of conservation parks, trail systems, and streams. The 100-foot riparian corridors will facilitate wildlife migration. Fisheries habitat will be enhanced with the creation of pool and riffle complexes and restoration of cover habitat via willow plantings on the stream corridors. The FWP will be consulted for their input on the stream enhancement designs as part of the 310 permitting process. Fish Wildlife and Parks will be contacted before doing any further development of the property. G. Historical Features Please see letter from the State Historic Preservation Office, Appendix . H. Agriculture Former agricultural practices at the site included crop production, dairy farming, and cattle ranching on the entire 167 acres. However, the land has been out of production since being purchased several years ago. Adjacent land includes the Regional Park and development in the near future – i.e., no farmland in production. I. Agricultural Water User Facilities Spring Ditch is a stream/ditch that currently flows through the project site. The stream will be “rebuilt” for a portion of it, and will have to flow through several culverts to accomodate road construction. However, in all instances of modification, it will be designed to maintain the same flow and quantity to downstream users. As stated above, a 310 permit from the Gallatin Conservation District, as well as a 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have already been obtained. 758 J. Water and Sewer N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. K. Stormwater Management N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. L. Streets, Roads, and Alleys N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. M. Utilities N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. N. Educational Facilities N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. O. Land Use N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. P. Parks and Recreation Facilities N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. Q. Neighborhood Center N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. R. Lighting Plan N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. 759 S. Miscellaneous N/A – No improvements will be constructed in conjunction with this minor subdivision. 760