Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5 - Buffalo Run Response to City CommentsResponse to City Comments 2.11.2022 21-424 Homestead at Buffalo Run Planning – Danielle Garber dgarber@bozeman.net 1. BMC 38.520.040 - 7-foot sidewalk required where adjacent to perpendicular parking spaces. Sidewalks in the NW corner of parking facility #1 have been adjusted to be 7’ wide with 18’ parking spaces. All other locations satisfy this requirement. Where sidewalks are adjacent to parking, walks are 7’ wide with 18’ parking stalls, all other locations walk remain 5’ wide with 20’ parking stalls. 2. BMC 38.510.030.J - Where a 10-foot setback is not provided between residential living areas and pedestrian paths. One of the other transition options must be utilized. Provide details for each building with a special residential frontage for what element is being used, and how it meets the standard. Please see updated sheet S2 -SITE PLAN. Special Residential Block frontages have been updated to call out which option (Per BMC 38.510.030.J) is used. The Site plan uses both Option 1 & Option 2. 1. SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCK FRONTAGE - OPTION 1: RAISED DECK OR PORCH OPTION. PORCH/DECKS ARE 60 SF MIN., RAISED 1' ABOVE GRADE, AND IS 6' DEEP MIN. 2. SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL BLOCK FRONTAGE - OPTION 2: FRONT SETBACK OPTIONS. IN ALL LOCATIONS, A 10' MIN. SETBACK IS PROVIDED BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND FACE OF BUILDING. 3. The applicant has indicated that each phase will be constructed concurrently. Provide further detail on phased occupancy. Will sub-phasing be desired so that a certificate of occupancy can be issued as each phase progresses, or will each phase forego occupancy until all improvements and buildings are completed? It is the applicant’s intent to construct all public improvements in one phase. Building permits will be obtained individually to allow for sequenced occupancy. Each building will be its own “sub-phase” or sequence. Any outstanding improvements such as landscaping, will be financially guaranteed through an Improvements agreement and installed towards the end of the project to ensure no landscaping is damaged during construction. A Sequencing plan has been included as sheet S1 – Phasing Plan. 4. Shared open space must be separated from ground level windows, streets, service areas and parking lots via landscaping, fencing, and/or other acceptable treatments that enhance safety and privacy for both the shared open space and dwelling units. Areas counted toward usable open space may not be landscaping beds and snow storage. Provide an accurate border outside of these areas. Annotate dimensions and area of all open space areas on this plan. Please See Plan Sheet S5 -OPEN SPACE PLAN. Open space areas have been revised to meet requirements per BMC Sec. 38.520.060. See Landscape plan for landscaping within these shared open space areas. Rowhomes have usable open space both on patios and roof top decks. This has been updated on S5-OPEN SPACE PLAN. Color hatch has been added to Rowhome roof top decks. 5. BMC 38.610.030 - Provide details once provided. Provide a wetland delineation for all wetlands present on site. A wetlands delineation has been submitted to the USACE and determination has been made with wetlands onsite being considered jurisdictional. The owner is continuing forward with this process to receive the required permitting. 6. BMC 38.320.030.C - Roofs with a slope less than 3:12 have a maximum height of 40-feet. This building and others exceed the maximum height, which is measured from finished grade to the top of the roof, by 1' 7". Roof Slopes have been adjusted to 3:12. Please see the updated elevations. 7. BMC 38.320.030.A - The departure language states: Departures from the maximum lot size requirements may be allowed where the planned development fits into the context of the neighborhood and proposed pedestrian and vehicular circulation measures meet community objectives. Staff is concerned that the neighborhood in certain areas will feel homogenous with too much repetition and little variety. For example, Avenue C is proposed with 4 buildings that look identical at different lengths. Please respond to this concern. How will buildings of the same style be differentiated? Would it be possible to provide some perspective views of the neighborhood? We have worked hard to bring forward a variety of product types and finishes for our project and believe that it will feel unique. We believe our project is meeting the criteria for a departure from the maximum lot size because we are proposing to extend and enhance the overall pedestrian and vehicular circulation to help meet the community goals. Specifically, with regards to staffs concerns we have made an effort to break up the building elevations along “Avenue C” to give additional character to the site. The buildings of Avenue C have used the materials in individual schemes in order to give some additional variation. In a gesture to make the architecture vary between these buildings we have added columns to 2 of the buildings covered entries and tie backs to the other 2 buildings covered entries. Please see Appendix T for an elevation of what Avenue C is intended to look like. 8. BMC 38.320.030.C - Buildings A-F are exceeding maximum height for R-4 with a less than 3:12 roof. Roof Slopes have been adjusted to 3:12. Please see the updated elevations. 9. The 14 duplex structures do not have required open space. Staff is considering them 1-4 household which does not have an open space requirement. Please adjust the table accordingly. Understood. All Duplex buildings have been removed from the Open Space Calculation chart on C-COVER SHEET. 10. BMC 38.360.250.E - Provide livable square feet for the rowhouse units so that staff has an open space calculation. All shared open space areas have been revised to not conflict with snow storage/landscape beds. Rowhome building living space (SF) has been calculated and added to the Open Space Calculation Chart on C-Cover Sheet. Shared open space dimensions have been added to S5- OPEN SPACE PLAN. 11. C017 – Existing site features and topography is not present in the drawings folder please provide. This sheet was mistakenly omitted from the original submittal upload. Please see the revised drawings with this 71.02 Existing Site Features & Topography included. 12. BMC 38.540.050.A.1.a(1) - On-street parking may be deducted from minimum requirements. Please restructure this calculation to show on-street parking as a parking reduction. Parking calculation charts and notes have been restructured to account for on-street parking. On-street parking on Kurk Drive (25 spaces), Homestead Ave (30 spaces) and Buffalo Run Ave (34 spaces) to count as a parking reduction, totaling 89 spaces calculated towards the deduction. Total Required parking has been reduced to 400 Spaces. See S3- PARKING PLAN. 13. BMC 38.540.050.A - In order to count a space inside a garage towards minimum required parking, the stall length must be 22-feet interior wall to interior wall. a. Building G & L - Units 1, 4, 5 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. b. Building I - Units 1 and 2 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. c. Building J - Units 1-4 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. d. Building K - Units 1, 4, 5 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. e. Building O - Units 1 and 2 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. f. Building M - Units 1 and 2 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. g. Building N - Units1-4 cannot count the 2nd stall towards minimum required parking. Garages have been revised so that stall lengths are 22’. Revised plans with clouded dimensions are provided. Building – Ben Abbey babbey@bozeman.net 1. Building I - What standard are these being Design under in compliance with Section R302 of the IRC - Two-family or Townhouse? Fire separation is key. a. Applies to all rowhouse style units. This will be confirmed at building permit review, but all units are designed under the 2018 IRC with applicable jurisdictional codes. Engineering – Alicia Paz-Solis apazsolis@bozeman.net 1. BMC 38.220.060 (12.F) - Traffic Generation - As presented, the trip distribution shows approximately an 80/20 percent split for Fowler Lane and Kurk Drive, respectively. The Engineering Department questions this trip distribution. With a shorter travel distance and a more direct route to the fully constructed collector and arterial network and to the destinations to the northeast, it seems likely that more than 20% of the trips will utilize Kurk Drive over Fowler Lane. The Transportation Impact Study (TIS) must be updated to provide additional detail to support the distribution as presented. Prior to site plan resubmittal, the applicant is encouraged to contact COB Transportation Engineer. The primary trip distribution was developed based on the proposed site layout in consideration of proposed buildings, accesses to the local street network, parking areas, and likely trip origins and destinations. a. Each building was evaluated individually for proposed trip origins and destinations outside of the immediate study area (listed below), resulting in the indicated trip distribution. i. Stucky Road – West of Fowler Lane (To/From the West) | 17% ii. South 19th Avenue – North of Stucky Road (To/From the North) | 70% iii. South 19th Avenue – South of Goldenstein Lane (To/From the South) | 3% iv. Fowler Lane – South of Buffalo Run (To/From the South) | 10% b. Utilization of Fowler Lane provides a more direct route with less friction points, fewer traffic signals and stop-controlled intersections, fewer required turning movements, and opportunity for increased travel speeds. It provides direct access to Stucky Road, which links to the other major collector and arterial roadways in the area without having to travel through Meadow Creek Subdivision. Utilization of Kurk Drive may be more direct for non-motorized users, but more restrictive for motorized users. 2. BMC 38.220.060.12 - Fowler Lane must be utilized for the majority of the construction traffic trips. Additional detail on a construction traffic plan must be provided. Further information is needed with respect to proposed improvements and timing (i.e. when does Fowler Lane need to be completed). The selected contractor shall use Fowler Lane as shown on the attached Sheet C015. The contractor shall submit additional details to the City of Bozeman regarding timing, traffic control, etc. as the project nears construction. a. The submitted TIS indicates that Fowler Lane is proposed to be paved from Blackwood Road north to Stucky Road. It is the City's understanding that the applicant would build Fowler Lane adjacent to the subject property, not to Blackwood Road. Building Fowler Lane down to Blackwood Road is not a City requirement. Noted. After discussion with both the City of Bozeman and Gallatin County Road and Bridge Department, pavement will end after the lane transition south of the property. The remaining section south of that will be gravel. This will be addressed with a future resubmittal for the Offsite Plan Set. b. Adjacent to the property, Fowler Lane will need to be built to City Minor Arterial standards, and to a two-lane County standards from Kurk Drive north to Stucky Road. The applicant is advised that Gallatin County will need to review the infrastructure plan set for Fowler Lane. Acknowledged. The County was sent a review set of plans to review concurrently with the City of Bozeman for Fowler Lane on December 30, 2021. c. A future maintenance agreement for Fowler Lane between Gallatin County and the City will need to be in place as the development moved towards final approval. Acknowledged. 3. The applicant must provide updated number of trips per phases of this development. An updated Traffic Impact Study has been included as an attachment. The project is proposed to be constructed in one phase. 4. BMC 38.540.020.M - The applicant must identify snow storage areas on the Site Plan for the parking area. Snow removal storage areas must be sufficient to store snow accumulation on site. Such areas shall not cause unsafe ingress/egress to the parking areas, shall not cause snow to be deposited on public rights-of-way, shall not include areas provided for required parking access and spaces, and shall not be placed in such a manner as to damage landscaping. Dedicated snow storage has been shown on the updated design drawings to maximize available onsite storage. Since the snow storage in the northwest portion of the site was unacceptable to the City of Bozeman per the original submittal, the HOA will contract a snow removal contractor to haul away the excess snow that cannot be stored onsite. Revised locations are shown on the attached sheets and a revised snow storage report has been attached. 5. BMC 38.610.050 Wetland Determinations – The applicant will need (to continue) to complete a jurisdictional wetland delineation in accordance with the procedures specified in the Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands. The applicant is advised that any impact to jurisdictional wetlands will require 404 permit from USACE. A wetlands delineation has been submitted to the USACE and determination has been made with wetlands onsite being considered jurisdictional. The owner is continuing forward with this process to receive the required permitting. 6. BMC 38.410.130 - Water Rights - The applicant must contact Griffin Nielsen with the City Engineering Department to obtain a determination of cash-in-lieu of water rights (CILWR). CILWR must be paid prior to site plan approval. Acknowledged. The owner has been in coordination with the City of Bozeman regarding this issue. 7. The applicant ought to consider putting in larger service lines to account for headloss associated with low water pressures in the area. Noted. Loss of pressure in service lines will be considered by the MEP consultant prior to installation to ensure adequate level of service at expected peak flows. 8. The applicant will need to provide further detail in their Phasing Plan which shows a. How the Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is tied to the proposed Phasing Plan; and Phasing was probably in incorrect terminology. The project is proposed to be completed in a single phase but with separate construction sequences. The TIS should therefore be applicable to the entire project. b. A separate exhibit will need to be provided showing all proposed off-site infrastructure improvements. This could be an infrastructure call out on the Site Plan showing what improvement will be completed with the Site Plan. An exhibit showing the location of the offsite improvements is attached (Appendix S) to meet this requirement. 9. BMC 38.270.030.D – Concurrent Construction - The applicant has requested concurrent construction for the public infrastructure associated with the project. In certain circumstances, the issuance of a building permit may be allowed prior to completion of the public infrastructure, provided that the following criteria are met. a. Subsequent to preliminary plat or plan approval, a concurrent construction plan, addressing all requirements of this section, must be submitted for review and approval of the community development director in consultation with the city engineer and with a recommendation from the development review committee. b. The following deliverables must be complete prior to concurrent construction approval: i. The property owner must enter into an improvements agreement to ensure the installation of required infrastructure and other applicable improvements, to be secured by any security or securities found in section 38.270.080; ii. The developer must provide and maintain hazard and commercial general liability insurance; iii. The developer must recognize, acknowledge and assume the increased risk of loss because certain public services do not exist at the site; iv. The developer must execute a hold harmless and indemnification agreement indemnifying, defending and holding harmless the city, its employees, agents and assigns from and against any and all liabilities, loss, claims, causes of action, judgments and damages resulting from or arising out of the issuance of a building permit under this section; v. The applicant must provide written approval from the fire department (Scott Mueller) that adequate fire protection services are available from existing hydrants, and water supply exists to meet needs during construction. A concurrent Construction plan will be submitted after site plan approval. The applicant is intending to enter into an improvements agreement and will execute a hold harmless agreement as required. All water utilities for the project shall be installed, tested and approved prior to vertical construction. The layout will be provided to the fire department for their review. 10. BMC 38.410.060 - All public easements must be provided in a clean draft format for review prior to individual phase’s site plan approval. Easements will be deemed inadequate if they are not in a final draft format (signatures are not required for the draft review). Easements must be stamped by a licensed professional surveyor. Draft easements have been included for review, please see Appendix J.1 – J.12. The exhibits and legal descriptions were drafted by a licensed professional surveyor. The exhibits will be stamped by the surveyor prior to filing. 11. BMC 38.200.010 - Per City Engineer, sewer main to service Fowler section between Stucky and Blackwood be sized at 15-inch (please refer to email correspondence from 12/10/21). Noted. The offsite improvements plan set that was submitted separately to the City of Bozeman on December 30, 2021 includes a 15” sewer main as directed by the email correspondence referred to above. The Homestead at Buffalo Run development requires only an 8” sewer main with 48” diameter manholes to adequately convey sewer from the property. Therefore, the developer is requesting compensation for the upsize in pipe materials to 15” and the corresponding manhole upsize to 60”. 12. BMC 38.200.010 - Per City Engineer, sewer main to service Fowler section between Stucky and Blackwood be sized at 15-inch (please refer to email correspondence from 12/10/21). Noted. The offsite improvements plan set that was submitted separately to the City of Bozeman on December 30, 2021 includes a 15” sewer main as directed by the email correspondence referred to above. The Homestead at Buffalo Run development requires only an 8” sewer main with 48” diameter manholes to adequately convey sewer from the property. Therefore, the developer is requesting compensation for the upsize in pipe materials to 15” and the corresponding manhole upsize to 60”. Fire Department – Scott Mueller smueller@bozeman.net 1. Proposed rowhouses with five or more units will require fire sprinkler systems unless separate properties and required fire separations. Fire supports phasing plan as proposed and would be willing to accept concurrent construction request as approved by other departments. Understood. This will be confirmed at building permit review, but all units are designed under the 2018 IRC with applicable jurisdictional codes. Forestry - Alex Nordquest anordquest@bozeman.net 1. Several trees conflicting with below ground utilities. No trees shall be planted within 10' of any utility. Tree locations have been adjusted to avoid conflicts with utilities. NW Energy – Kory Graham (See Below) 1. 21424 Homestead Buffalo Run Site Plan- NWE Project Engineer Kory Graham Kory.Graham@northwestern.com Acknowledged. 2. Applicant has submitted an application to NWE and is currently working with NWE Project Engineer Kory Graham. Continue to work with Kory throughout the design process. Understood. Drawings were provided to Kory on January 14, 2022. Coordination will continue. 3. Submit a drawing showing the plan and profile of the proposed meter screening method. Include screening wall footing details. Refer to previous submitted comments per NWE screening wall for guidance. Note: Screening walls cannot consist of rolling doors or other devices that are required to be opened to access the meters. A 30” wide or greater unobstructed entryway needs to be provided for NWE employees and safety professionals to access for operation, maintenance and emergency needs. NWE policy is to maintain a minimum 30-inches wide by 3-feet clear zone between the front of the meter and landscape screening or wall screening for self-contained meter bases and 48-inches for installations requiring cabinets. When using a screening wall most commercial applications require the 48-inch clear zone between the front of the meter and the wall. We have spoken with Engineer Kory Graham with NW Energy and he approves the design and has noted to state his approval in our response. Copy of email communication can be sent if necessary. We are using landscaping as the screening method. There will be no built wall or physical screen wall, therefore we do not have a detail. This comment asks for a detail (plan & profile) of the proposed meter screening method. In all meter box locations, we will be calling out a landscape buffer. Due to the required building setbacks (5’ non-irrigation zone), the landscaping will be in areas that do not conflict with this setback, underground utilities or the 30”x3’ maintenance clear zone. Parks – Mathew Lee mjlee@bozeman.net 1. General Comments- Parkland narrative is unclear. Please clarify the statement that “Based on current expected densities […] will require 2.26 acres of parkland.” This should be reworded to reflect that 2.26 acres of parkland is required at 8 DU/acre and 4 DU/acre will be given as CILP. Please see the updated Parks Master Plan for a revised narrative. 2. Private snow storage is not allowed on public parkland. Find an alternative snow storage location. Dedicated snow storage has been shown on the updated design drawings to maximize available onsite storage. Since the snow storage in the northwest portion of the site was unacceptable to the City of Bozeman per the original submittal, the HOA will contract a snow removal contractor to haul away the excess snow that cannot be stored onsite. Revised locations are shown on the attached sheets and a revised snow storage report has been attached. 3. Concrete sidewalks around the park are to be a minimum of 6’ wide and 6” thick reinforced concrete, see COB Design Standards and Specifications Policy – Sec. IV.B. Noted. The sidewalks around the park are proposed to be 6’ wide and 6” thick. Further clarification is provided on Civil Sheet Series C200 (Site Plan) – see attached. 4. Many of the IILP proposed are considered baseline improvements. a. The bluegrass playfield and tree lawn, associated irrigation, fine grading, and construction surveying would be part of baseline improvements, per Sec. 38.420.080.A and the PROST Appendix C – Seeding and Irrigation. Mobilization costs are not considered part of IILP. b. Street trees are required at 1 per 50’, per Sec 38.550.070 and Sec. 38.550.050.E. The trees in excess of this ratio may be counted as IILP, but Parks and Forestry prefer these to be placed within the park interior. c. The trail is required as a baseline improvement, per Sec. 38.420.110 Advisory Comments See Meadow Creek Park Narrative and Meadow Creek Park expansion site plan. The baseline improvements listed in the cost estimate and narrative have been revised per comments 4 a, b and c. 5. Continue the midblock crossing and park trail through Ainsworth Park to the existing east trail network per BMC Sec. 38.420.110 and the PROST - 10.8 Trail Development. The trail in both parks can be built to a Class IIA Trail standard. Please coordinate with Forestry regarding the trail alignment. The mixed-use trail has been extended from the midblock crossing on Avenue C to the east boundary shared with the existing Ainsworth Park. The landscape plans include additional details regarding improvements within the existing park. The trail in the existing park and expansion will be built to Class IIA. A note has been added to plans regarding coordination with Forestry for final trail alignment. Storm Water – Adam Oliver AOliver@bozeman.net 1. Stormwater generated by the project needs to flow to infrastructure that will be maintained by the owner or property owners' association. The grade breaks and the maintenance plan need to be aligned on this. Appendix E Storm Drain Report. Stormwater generated within the site is captured to the maximum extent practicable and is treated via facilities owned and operated by the property owner’s association. Please see the attached revised stormwater report. 2. Per BMC 38.410.080.D, Stormwater ponds serving multiple lots in separate ownership must not be located on private lots or public rights-of-way. Sheet L1.5 Landscape Plan The site will be under a single ownership group, Buffalo Run Bozeman, LLC. Stormwater treatment site areas is outside the public road easements. Additionally, no lots are being created with the site plan since it is not a subdivision. 3. 38.410.080.H: Appropriate root depth, functional maintenance access, and detail must be included in the landscape plan. Sheet L1.5 Landscape Plan Underground facilities serving streets are placed with structures as close as feasible to the proposed road easement boundaries for access. Additional detail was added to the cross- section for the Stormtech® facilities located near trees to provide tree root barriers to prevent issues with these installations. Tree locations were coordinated with the architect to relocate away from proposed underground facilities. Please see Landscape Plans for this detail. The Civil Stormtech® detail on C703 has been used and combined with a landscape detail. This detail will show the typical landscaping that in near/on top of these units and the root system (if any) of any planting in this area. 4. Underground retention is not shown. Ownership of this parcel of easement, access, and vertical clearance above the retention facility are all concerns. More info needed. Sheet L1.6 Landscape Plan Underground retention areas have been labeled on plans with reference to civil plans for additional detail. 5. Irrigation pipe and storm main are occupying the same space vertically. Sheet C301 NW Grading Plan. The irrigation pipe and storm mains no longer have any conflicts. 6. The west edge of the site has no proposed elevations. The ditch flows north along both sides of Fowler. How will water cross Kurk? Sheet C301 NW Grading Plan The existing ditch along the east side of Fowler Lane is proposed to be diverted to the west side of the road and combined with the existing west ditch. This diversion is proposed to be performed south of the property within the existing road easement to allow necessary length required for ditch elevation adjustments. The dimensions of the proposed combined ditch were adequately sized to convey irrigation flow from both existing ditches in addition to stormwater runoff. This diversion provides space required to route and treat stormwater runoff from Fowler Lane through the city section using a series of LID stormwater treatment ponds. Therefore, a culvert for the ditch along the east side of Fowler Lane at the intersection with Kurk Drive is not required. The offsite improvements plan set includes additional details regarding this design, and was submitted separately to the City of Bozeman Engineering Department on 12/30/2021. 7. Please provide a detail with the model of Stormtech chambers and height of water used to calculate volume. There is typically a 6" minimum gravel course, this capacity cannot be counted if it is expected to be in groundwater. Stormwater details were provided on Sheets C703 and C704 and included the chamber models proposed. The manufacture’s design tool was used to calculate the required chamber quantities and were included as attachments to the Stormwater Design Report. Please note that the stormwater volume calculated considers 100% retention and does not consider any infiltration during the design storm, which is conservative considering the gravelly nature of in-situ soils. Additionally, all Stormtech chambers were located above the seasonally-high groundwater as recorded and observed using onsite monitoring wells. The location and extents of Stormtech facilities that were designed for the public roadways have been modified since this submittal. The owner was unable to secure an easement for facilities that were proposed north of Kurk Drive. The facilities were relocated to parking lots on site and will be located within proposed easements to the City of Bozeman. These Stormtech facilities will be kept separate from the onsite facilities. Due to minimum cover available, it decided to switch solely to Stormtech model SC-160LP. Water/Sewer Division – John Alston jalston@bozeman.net 1. Mech. rooms too small please revise and submit with building permit. The mechanical rooms for the multi-family buildings have been re-sized and relocated to meet City of Bozeman requirements. The revised footprints are provided in the attached revised drawings. See architectural sheets for additional details.