Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21164 Alderson 5 Rowhouses SP_StaffReport Final Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 1 of 19 Application No. 21164 Type Site Plan Project Name Alderson 5 Rowhouses Summary The project involves the demolition of a historically non-contributing house followed by the redevelopment of a 9,835 square foot lot. The proposed structure is a 5 household apartment building comprised of 3 levels. While the applicant named the project as Rowhouses, staff has determined they are considered apartments as it relates to the municipal code. Refer to Criterion 5 for additional discussion on this topic. Parking will be provided in attached garages and on street. Zoning R-4 Growth Policy Urban Neighborhood Parcel Size 9,825 square feet Overlay District(s) Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) Street Address 806 W Alderson St Legal Description West Park Add, S12, TO2 S, RO 5 E, Block 50, Lot 1-3 & 6’ Adjacent to said lots. Owner Derryl Semour, 26 Riveside Dr. Bozeman, MT 59715 Applicant Joshua Allen, 23 Apex Dr Bozeman, MT 59718 Representative Joshua Allen, 23 Apex Dr Bozeman, MT 59718 Staff Planner Lynn Hyde Engineer Alicia Paz-Solis Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Newspaper Legal Ad 2/16/2022 to 03/03/2022 2/14/2022 2/16/2022 N/A Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee 9/8/2021 The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions Recommendation The application is adequate, conforms to standards, and is sufficient for approval with conditions and code provisions as noted below. Decision Authority Director of Community Development Date: March 17, 2022 Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 2 of 19 FINDINGS OF FACT AND APPEAL PROVISIONS CERTIFICATE A) PURSUANT to Chapter 38, Article 2, Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC), and other applicable sections of Ch.38, BMC, public notice was given, opportunity to submit comment was provided to affected parties, and a review of the Site Plan described in this report was conducted. The applicant proposed to the City a Site Plan (SP) to permit a 5 household apartment building comprised of 3 levels with parking in attached garages and on street within the R-4 Zoning District. The purposes of the Site Plan review were to consider all relevant evidence relating to public health, safety, welfare, and the other purposes of Ch. 38, BMC; to evaluate the proposal against the criteria of Sec. 38.230.100 BMC, and the standards of Ch. 38, BMC; and to determine whether the application should be approved, conditionally approved, or denied. B) It appeared to the Director that all parties and the public wishing to examine the proposed Site Plan and offer comment were provided the opportunity to do so. After receiving the recommendation of the relevant advisory bodies established by Ch. 38, Art. 210, BMC, and considering all matters of record presented with the application and during the public comment period defined by Ch. 38, BMC, the Director has found that the proposed Site Plan would comply with the requirements of the BMC if certain conditions were imposed. Therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before them regarding this application, the Director makes the following decision. C) The Site Plan has been found to meet the criteria of Ch. 38, BMC, and is therefore approved, subject to the conditions listed in this report and the correction of any elements not in conformance with the standards of the Title. The evidence contained in the submittal materials, advisory body review, public testimony, and this report, justifies the conditions imposed on this development to ensure that the Site Plan complies with all applicable regulations, and all applicable criteria of Ch. 38, BMC. On this17th day of March, 2022, Anna Bentley, Interim Director of Community Development, approved with conditions this Site Plan for and on behalf of the City of Bozeman as authorized by Sec. 38.200.010, BMC. D) This Director of Community Development’s project decision may be appealed by filing a documented appeal with and paying an appeal fee to the Clerk of the Commission for the City of Bozeman within 10 working days after the date of the final decision as evidenced by the Director’s signature, following the procedures of Sec. 38.250.030, BMC. DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE CONDITIONS ARE IN ADDITION TO ANY REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS IDENTIFIED IN THIS REPORT. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND CODE CORRECTIONS ARE REQUIRED AND WILL BE INCLUDED WITH THE FINAL REPORT PROVIDED TO THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1. Cash donation in-lieu of land dedication (CIL) for parkland must be approved by the review authority and paid in full to the City prior to final plan approval. 2. The Cash-in-lieu Water Rights (CILWR) contribution must be paid to the City in full prior to final plan approval. 3. Plans for all fire service lines must be submitted to the City Engineering Department (engsubmittals@bozeman.net) for review. The applicant must prepare plans and specifications for any fire service line in accordance with the City’s Fire Service Line Policy. The plans must be prepared by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system. The applicant must also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and domestic services 4" or larger, must be a standalone Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 3 of 19 submittal, separate from the site plan submittal. City of Bozeman applications for service must be completed by the applicant. 4. If not already filed for the subject site, the applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a) Street improvements to S 8th Ave. including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. b) Street improvements to S 11th Ave. including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. c) Street improvements to West College St, including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. d) Street improvements to West Koch St, including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. e) Intersection improvements S 8th Ave, and West College St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. f) Intersection improvements S 8th Ave, and Koch St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. g) Intersection improvements S 11th Ave, and West College St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. h) Intersection improvements S 11th Ave, and Koch St including lighting, signalization, paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage. The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of the improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the filed SID waiver prior to the site plan approval 5. The final bylaws for the condominiums, including the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the condominium development must be submitted and approved prior to final site plan approval. 6. The building is proposed over three existing lots. Prior to final site plan approval, a Subdivision Exemption (SE) or lot merger agreement must be submitted and approved. Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 4 of 19 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 5 of 19 Figure 2: Future Land Use Map Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 6 of 19 Figure 3: Proposed site plan Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 7 of 19 Figures 4: Conceptual Renderings Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 8 of 19 Figures 5: Conceptual Renderings Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 9 of 19 ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. Plan Review, Section 38.230.100, BMC In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the Director of Community Development shall consider the following: 1. Conformance with Article 1 - Consistency with the City’s adopted Growth Policy 38.100.040.D Meets Code? Growth Policy Land Use Urban Neighborhood Yes Zoning R-4 (Residential High Density) Yes Comments: Growth Policy: The Urban Neighborhood District ‘primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. . . The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries.’ This proposed project is consistent with the growth policy by a small infill development of a greater density. This project is replacing a single family home with five units in close proximity to services. Zoning: The intent of the R-4 (Residential High Density) District is to ‘provide for high-density residential development through a variety of compatible housing types and residentially supportive commercial uses in a geographically compact walkable area to serve the varying needs of the community’s residents. These purposes are accomplished by (1) Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community’s residents. . . ‘. The proposal is supporting the intent through the multi-household units in a geographically central location. The location is adjacent to commercial and residential districts. 2. Conformance with Article 1 - All other applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations (38.100.080) Condominium ownership Yes, with conditions of approval Comments: In order for the project to have condominium ownership, the applicant needs to submit the bylaws for the condominiums, including the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the condominium development. A draft copy was submitted with the Site Plan application, however a final copy must be submitted and approved prior to final site plan approval. 3. Conformance with Article 2, including the cessation of any current violations (38.200.160) Meets Code? Current Violations NA Comments: There are no known violations associated with this property or development. 4. Conformance with Article 2 - Submittal material (38.220) requirements and plan review for applicable permit types (38.230) Meets Code? Site Plan Yes, with standard conditions. Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 10 of 19 Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: NA Comments: No phasing is proposed. The applicant meets the Site Plan requirements with standard conditions applied. Any additional use permit (Conditional Use Permit) 38.230.120 or (Special use Permit) 38.230.120 NA Comments: No additional permits (i.e., Conditional Use Permit or Special Use Permit) are required. 5. Conformance with Article 3 - Zoning Provisions (38.300) Meets Code? Permitted uses 38.310 Apartment building Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: R-4 Setbacks (feet) Required Structures Proposed Parking / Loading Yes Front: 15’ 20’ NA Rear: 20’ 20’ NA Side: 5’ ~26’ NA Alley: 5’ 20’ NA Comments: The project meets the form and intensity standards outlined in 38.320.030. The project is located on a corner lot facing both S 8th Ave and W Alderson Street and requires the 15’ front setback apply to both streets which the proposal is doing. The applicant proposed the rear property line setback apply to the alley to the west and the side setback to the property to the south. Although the applicant titled this project the Alderson 5 Rowhouses, the development review team and the City’s legal staff determined the buildings to be apartments. Apartment buildings are defined in BMC 38.700.020 as a building other than a hotel, motel, townhouse, or rowhouse containing five or more dwelling units. Thus in order to qualify as an apartment building, the structure cannot meet the definition of a rowhouse. A rowhouse is defined in 38.700.160 as a dwelling unit that shares one or more common or abutting walls with one or more dwelling units. A rowhouse does not share common floors/ceilings with other dwelling units. The proposed building has two units that share a common floor/ceiling configuration, thus making it an apartment. The reason the form of building is of particular importance is this proposal has adequate lot size for a 5 unit apartment building, however not for a 5 unit rowhouse configuration. In the R-4 zoning district an apartment building need 5,000 sf for the first unit, and 1,200 sf for each additional unit. For a 5 unit building, the minimum lot size is 9,800sf (5,000sf + (1,200sf x 4 units)). The lot is 9,825 square feet, thus having adequate lot size. Lot coverage Proposed 32% Allowed: Maximum 50% Yes Building height Proposed 45’ 8” (3:12, 14:12 roof pitch) Allowed: 50’ (greater than 3:12 pitch) Yes Comments: The proposal is consistent with the lot coverage and building height limits. Applicable zone specific or overlay standards 38.330-40 Yes Comments: The project does not fall within a historic district, but is located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD). The NCOD standards are discussed in Section 11 & 12 below. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: The proposal is consistent with the general land use standards and requirements. Because this is a corner lot, both South 8th Ave and West Alderson St. are being treated as a front setback with the 15’ Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 11 of 19 Applicable supplemental use criteria 38.360 NA Supplemental uses/type Comments: There are no supplemental use criteria applicable to this project. Wireless facilities 38.370 NA Affordable Housing 38.380.010 NA Affordable housing plan NA Comments: Affordable housing is not required, nor is it proposed. 6a. Conformance with Article 4 - Community Design Provisions: Transportation Facilities and Access (38.400) Meets Code? Streets 38.400.010 Yes Street and road dedication 38.400.020 Yes Access easements Yes Level of Service 38.400.060 NA Transportation grid adequate to serve site Yes Comments: Due to the small size of this project, the City has determined a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is not required pursuant BMC 38.220.080.A (2.g). Sidewalks 38.400.080 Yes Comments: All external and internal sidewalks meet City codes and connect to relevant destinations. Drive access 38.400.090 Access to site: 1 driveway access Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: The site has vehicular access via an alley off W Alderson Street. All units have pedestrian access from W Alderson St and a pedestrian connection is provided from S 8th Ave to the rear of the building. Street vision triangle 38.400.100 Yes Transportation pathways 38.400.110 Yes Pedestrian access easements for shared use pathways and similar transportation facilities NA Public transportation 38.400.120 NA Comments: Street vision triangles have been reviewed and are adequate with no obstructions proposed within the triangles. 6b. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Community Design and Elements (38.410) Meets Code? Neighborhood centers 38.410.020 NA Comments: Not applicable as it is not a subdivision nor greater than ten net acres in size. Lot and block standards 38.410.030-040 Yes Midblock crossing: rights of way for pedestrians alternative block delineation NA Comments: No midblock crossing or alternative block delineation is required or proposed. If the development is adjacent to an existing or approved public park or public open space area, have provisions been made in the plan to avoid interfering with public access to and use of that area NA Provisions for utilities including efficient public services and utilities 38.410.050-060 Yes Easements (City and public utility rights-of-way etc.) Yes Water, sewer, and stormwater Yes Other utilities (electric, natural gas, communications) Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 12 of 19 CIL of water rights (CILWR) Yes Comments: CILWR is required. A CILWR determination must be finalized and paid prior to final site plan approval. Stormwater has been reviewed and found adequate by the Engineering Division. Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 Yes Comments: The applicant provided a sewer line condition assessment that was found adequate by the Engineering Division. The applicant must still submit a fire service line plan prior to final plan approval. The applicant must prepare plans and specifications for any fire service line in accordance with the City’s Fire Service Line Policy. The plans must be prepared by a Professional Engineer and be provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to initiation of construction of the fire service or fire protection system. The applicant must also provide Professional Engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction certification and preparation of mylar record drawings. Fire service plans, and domestic services 4" or larger, must be a standalone submittal, separate from the site plan submittal. City of Bozeman applications for service must be completed by the applicant. Grading & drainage 38.410.080 Yes Location, design and capacity of stormwater facilities Yes Stormwater maintenance plan Yes Landscaping: native species, curvilinear, 75% live vegetation 38.410.080.H NA Comments: A stormwater management report has been reviewed and found sufficient by Engineering. No stormwater retention facilities are proposed that require landscaping. Watercourse setback 38.410.100 NA Watercourse setback planting plan 38.410.100.2.f NA 6c. Conformance with Article 4 – Community Design Provisions: Park and Recreation Requirements (38.420) Meets Code? Parkland requirements 38.420.020.A (5 new units minus 1 existing units) 4 units x .03 acres/du = .12 acres Yes Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 To be determined (See comments below) Yes Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: The cash donation in lieu (CIL) request must be approved by the review authority and paid prior to final plan approval. For a site plan, the Parks and Recreation Director is the review authority. At the time this staff report was written, the application had not received CIL approval by the Director, thus it will be a condition of approval that the Directors reviews and approves, and the applicant pays the CIL prior to final site plan approval. The proposal includes five units the applicant would owe CIL for, however it is anticipated the applicant will receive a credit for the existing single household that is being demolished, thus CIL would be required for the net increase of four units. Park Frontage 38.420.060 NA Park development 38.420.080 NA Recreation pathways 38.420.110 NA Park/Recreational area design NA Comments: No onsite public parks or paths are proposed. 7a. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Block Frontage Standards (38.510) Meets Code? Block frontage classification “Landscape’ block frontage Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 13 of 19 Departure criteria NA Comments: The project is on a corner lot that faces two streets, S 8th Ave to the east, and W Alderson St to the north. Both of these streets have Landscape block frontage where adjacent to the proposed project. The project is meeting the requirements for the landscape block frontage on both sides, and is requesting no departures. BMC 38.510.020.F.4. requires ‘all buildings on a corner at the intersection of two streets must be placed adjacent to and present a front and primary façade to both street block frontages’. The proposed building has entrances facing both W Alderson St and S 8th Ave. The building entrances are visible and directly accessible from the street with appropriate weather protection provided. Both the north and east façade are required to have at least 15% transparency. The north façade that faces W Alderson St proposed 73% and the east façade facing S 8th Ave has proposed 15%, thus meeting this provision. Low level landscaping has been provided where residential windows are facing the public right of way. 7b. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Site Planning and Design Elements (38.520) Meets Code? Design and arrangement of the elements of the plan (e.g., buildings, circulation, open space and landscaping, etc.) so that activities are integrated with the organizational scheme of the community, neighborhood, and other approved development and produce an efficient, functionally organized and cohesive development Yes Relationship to adjacent properties 38.520.030 Yes Non-motorized circulation and design systems to enhance convenience and safety across parking lots and streets, including, but not limited to paving patterns, pathway design, landscaping and lighting 38.520.040 Yes Comments: All units are connected to the public sidewalk via a pedestrian sidewalk. A sidewalk has also been provided connecting the rear of the building and garages as well as the fire riser room to S 8th Ave. Design of vehicular circulation systems to assure that vehicles can move safely and easily both within the site and between properties and activities within the general community 38.520.050 Yes Internal roadway design 38.520.050.D NA Comments: No internal roadways are proposed. The existing household has a driveway cut off W Alderson St. The proposal eliminates that curb cut, proposing access solely off the alley on the western border of the property. On-site open space 38.520.060 Yes Total required 700sf Yes Total provided 1,960sf Yes Comments: The project has 5 units total, of those 5 units four of them require 150 square feet per unit and one only requires 100 sf as it is a one bedroom. Thus, 4(150sf) + 1(100sf) = 700sf required. The project proposes a mixture of balconies and ground level private open space totaling 1,683 sf, thus meeting this requirement. The project proposes the open space be provided via balconies, which is allowed to meet up to 50% of the requirements per BMC 38.520.060.B.c, as well as via ground level private outdoor space. BMC 38.520.060.B.b allows ground level private outdoor space to meet 100% of the open space requirements provided there is a fence or hedge enclosing the area. The proposal has a 4’ tall fence demarcating the private ground level outdoor space, thus meeting this standard. Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 14 of 19 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 Yes Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 10.5 required Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b NA Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 NA Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c Provided off-street 8 Provided on-street 3 Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 2 required Yes Comments: 1 (3 bedroom) = 3 spaces 3 (2 bedroom) = 6 spaces 1 (1 bedroom) = 1.5 spaces Total required = 10.5 spaces The proposal provides sufficient parking via a combination of off-street garage spaces (8 spaces) and on-street spaces (3) that are adjacent to the property and not located within the vision triangles. Bicycle parking is provided for each unit within the units garages. Loading and uploading area requirements 38.540.080 NA First berth – minimum 70 feet length, 12 feet in width, 14 feet in height NA Additional berth – minimum 45 feet length NA Comments: Not applicable to this proposal. Location and design of service areas and mechanical equipment 38.520.070 Yes Comments: The trash and recycling are proposed to be stored within the garages meeting the screening requirements. The outdoor meters have adequate screening between the service areas and public rights of way. 7c. Conformance with Article 5 – Project Design: Building Design (38.530) Meets Code? Compatibility with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of the site and the adjacent neighborhoods and other approved development 38.530.030 Yes Building massing and articulation 38.530.040 Yes Building details, materials, and blank wall treatments 38.530.050-070 Yes Comments: The proposed building is approximately 100 feet long on the northern façade facing West Alderson St, and approximately 36 feet on the eastern façade facing South 8th Ave. The northern façade is articulated through the change of windows, entries with weather protection features, change in roofline (with a pitched roofline segment), building materials and vertical modulation tied to a change in roofline modulations. The articulation provided is sufficient to reduce the perceived massing of the building and add visual interest. The proposed building material is fiber cement that integrates a mix of colors and textures. It is sufficiently balanced with façade details that add visual interest from the ground level and adjacent buildings. There are no walls that meet the blank wall definition proposed. 7e. Conformance with Article 5 – Landscaping (38.550) Meets Code? Mandatory landscaping requirements 38.550.050 Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 15 of 19 Drought tolerant species 75% required Yes Parking lot landscaping NA Additional screening NA Street frontage Yes Street median island NA Acceptable landscape materials Yes Protection of landscape areas Yes Irrigation: plan, water source, system type Yes Residential adjacency Yes Comments: The proposed landscaping plans meet the mandatory landscaping requirements and include street trees, drought tolerant species, and residential adjacency trees as required. Landscaping of public lands 38.550.070 NA Comments: No landscaping of public lands is required or proposed. 7f. Conformance with Article 5 – Signs (38.560) Meets Code? Allowed SF/building 38.560.060 NA Proposed SF/building NA Comments: No signs are proposed with this project. 7g. Conformance with Article 5 – Lighting (38.560) Meets Code? Site lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040 Yes Building-mounted lighting (supports, cutoff, footcandles, temperature) 38.570.040.B Yes Comments: Outdoor wall mounted sconce lights and ceiling mounted downlights are proposed and specification sheets were provided that meet the code requirements. 8. Conformance with Article 6 – Natural Resource Protection Meets Code? Floodplain regulations 38.600 NA Wetland regulations 38.610 NA Comments: There are no known or mapped floodplain or wetlands on site. 9. Relevant Comment from Affected Parties (38.220) Meets Code? Public Comment Yes Comments: The public comment period ran from February 16 through March 3, 2022. Six individual public comments were received. A summary of the public comments are provided below in an attempt to best capture the essence of the public commenters. In addition, general clarifying questions were posed and answered when possible. A copy of all comments can be found in the project file. Incompatible with the character of the neighborhood. Concern was provided that the proposal is out of scale with the surrounding neighborhood(s) and would “negatively impact the look and feel of the current and historic surrounding neighborhoods”. Specific components of the project were cited including the fabric and scale of the neighborhood, ‘vertical expression’, height, balconies facing the elementary school, lack of architectural interest facing S. 8th Ave., Blocking sunlight. There was concern noted that the height of the building would block sunlight from existing neighbors, the adjacent school (the school garden was specifically noted), sidewalks and streets. Parking issues. Concern was provided that the neighborhood’s on-street parking is congested due to MSU students cars, the adjacent school staff vehicles and visitors, and existing residents parking and that the proposed project will not be able to use the three on-street parking spaces that were counted towards the parking requirements. Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 16 of 19 Construction issues: Concern of the noise and heavy equipment during construction adjacent to the school which may be “noisy, dangerous and tricky”. After reviewing the comments received, it is understood that some neighbors may not like the proposal or wish components changed, however no errors in the code or process were discovered that would require redesign or a process modifications. 10. Division of Land Pertaining to Subdivisions (38.240-Part 4) Meets Code? Subdivision exemptions NA Required easements NA Comments: No division of land is proposed at this time. 11. Standards for Certificate of Appropriateness (38.340) Meets Code? Certificate of appropriateness standards Yes Secretary of the Interiors Standards for new construction Yes Architectural appearance Yes Proportion of doors and windows Yes Relationship of building masses and spaces Yes Roof shape Yes Scale Yes Directional expression, with regard to the dominant horizontal or vertical expression of surrounding structures Yes Architectural details Yes Concealment of non-period appurtenances, such as mechanical equipment Yes Materials and color schemes Yes Comments: The proposed project is located within the NCOD. This means that the project must adhere to a higher level of design, focus on the relationship of the surrounding area, and maintain a level of integrity and character that makes up the NCOD. Staff reviewed the proposed design and finds the project meets all applicable COA criteria including NCOD design guidelines. Review of demolition of historic structures or sites 38.340.080 Yes Historic Structure per 38.700.090 No Comments: The structure that proposed to be demolished is not an eligible historic structure as defined in article 7 of the UDC, per the MONTANA HISTORIC PROPERTY RECORD. Approval of the proposed subsequent development is required for all historic structures proposed for demolition and for the proposed movement of any structure of site. The subsequent development is receiving Site Plan approval in tandem with the demolition approval. Yes Public Notice: The public comment period ran from February 16 through March 3, 2022. Six individual public comments were received. No comments were made on the demolition of the structure. Yes Criteria Yes 1. The property’s historic significance. The property is determined to not meet the NRHP eligibility as demonstrated by the updated Montana Historic Property form. Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 17 of 19 2. Whether the structure has no viable economic life remaining. This structure may have viable economic life remaining as it is still habitable. However due to it not being an eligible contributing structure, this is not applicable. Yes 3. Whether the subsequent development complies with Section 38.340.050 (standards for certificates of appropriateness). Yes, this report finds the subsequent development in compliance with standards. Yes 4. Whether the subsequent development includes construction of new building(s) unless the existing character of the area does not include buildings. Yes, the subsequent development includes the construction of a new infill building in compliance with zoning. Yes 5. Subsequent development requires a building permit and does not include proposals which leave the site without building(s) or structure(s). The subsequent development requires a building permit and does not propose to leave the site without a building. Yes Notwithstanding the above, for projects proposing the removal of a historic structure, which do not qualify for sketch plan review pursuant to 38.230.070, the review authority may determine the proposed subsequent site development is more appropriate for the site based upon the criteria in 38.230.100 (plan review criteria).The Director determines that the proposed subsequent site development is more appropriate for the site than the existing building and use based on the criterial in 38.230.100. Comments: A Montana Historical and Architectural Inventory was submitted that states, “Research in the sources consulted in this survey has not yielded any significant historical information concerning persons or events associated with this property”. The inventory card goes on to state, “This structure is an intrusive element within a potential historic district.” The proposed subsequent development is more appropriate for the site and will leave the side with a new infill building and will not result in a vacant site. 12. Conformance with the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District Design (NCOD) Guidelines Meets Code? Introduction: This project has been reviewed in accordance with the NCOD Guidelines and has been found consistent with the standards within. The project supports the community’s design goal for Bozeman to preserve the integrity of the character of its streetscapes within the NCOD. The property is not located within a historic district, and thus has been reviewed against the standards found in Chapter 2, Design Guidelines for all Properties, and Chapter 3, Guidelines for Residential Areas. Yes Chapter 2: Design Guidelines for all Properties • A. Topography: The buildings conform to the existing topography. There are no extensive cut and fills proposed. • B. Street Patterns. The street patterns of the area are established by existing streets and alleys, and by the setbacks found within the UDC. The structures adhere to the required setbacks and where possible the units have vehicular access from the alleys. This setback and additional landscaping will continue the existing neighborhoods character. • C. Alleys .While the alley is required to be paved, the traditional scale and width is being maintained and the edge of the alley and property lines are defined by buildings and/or fences. Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 18 of 19 • D. Streetscape. The traditional streetscape is being reinforced with new street trees proposed. Staff worked with the applicant to see if any existing trees could be saved, however it was determined it was most appropriate to plant new street trees. • F. Building Form. The building proposes 14/12 pitched cross gables. • G. Solid-to-Void Ratio. The building has an appropriate solid to void ratio and avoids large glass surfaces. Rectangular windows break up the solid walls at a cadence and scale similar to that seen on the historic buildings in the neighborhood. • H. Materials. The building proposes horizontal siding. The applicant states, “The façade follows a traditional layering of cladding, while making use of contemporary building materials. The first story is visually established by the exterior by dark gray vertical board and batten cladding and trims that anchors the building to the street level.” The materials are similar in scale, proportion and texture to those used traditionally. • I. Architectural Character. This building is not attempting to replicate historic styles. The applicant states that the architectural design is defined by “simple gable forms reminiscent of pre-World War architecture, directional expression of materials and exterior details, and symmetrical rhythm of windows and entries. The focus is to create architecture that represents its time and place while being responsive to its context ‘within a potential historic district.’” • J. Parking: The visual impact of surface parking is minimized by the majority of the parking being provided in rear facing garages that are accessible from an alley. Chapter 3: Guidelines for Residential Areas • A. Hierarchy of Public and Private Space. The project supports the traditional hierarchy via the fenced private front yard with a walkway running through it, leading to a street oriented stoop entrance for the units. • B. Building Mass and Scale. While the buildings are three stories high, which is taller than the more traditional residential homes, the proposed design uses breaks in the roofline to break up the gable roof and decrease the perceived mass and scale of the building. The width of the primary façade is nearing 100 feet in length. This relatively longer width is broken up into smaller sections via vertical change in material, modulation and windows. • C. Roof Form. The building proposes 14/12 pitched cross gables • D. Secondary Structures. There are no secondary structures proposed. • E. Multi-Household. The proposed buildings scale is broken up with gable roofs and vertical modulation that gives it the appearance of ‘modules’ that are more similar in size and scale with those traditionally seen in the neighborhood. Yes Appendices Yes Staff Report Alderson 5 Rowhouses Site Plan Application 21164 March 17, 2022 Page 19 of 19 Comments: No further comments beyond what was previously discussed regarding the NCOD Guidelines.