Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout21461 Ridge Lot 6s SP Staff Report FINAL Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 1 of 13 Application No. 21461 Type Site Plan Project Name Ridge PUD Lot 6 Summary The project is a pad site on Lot 6 located within the Ridge Planned Unit Development (the “PUD”) with a proposed two-story building, approximately 15,120 gross square feet. The building has a shell on level 1 for two separate tenants. Level 2 will be (6) 2-bedroom multifamily residential units. Zoning R-0 Growth Policy Urban Neighborhood Parcel Size 14,967 square feet Overlay District(s) None Street Address 4204 Ravalli St Legal Description Ridge Athletic Club Sub, S10, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 6, Plat J-465-A Owner DA Land Company, 2320 W Main St, Suite 6, Bozeman, MT 59718 Applicant Martina Parrish, 45 Architecture, 1246 W Lincoln St, Suite D, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative Martina Parrish, 45 Architecture, 1246 W Lincoln St, Suite D, Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Planner Lynn Hyde Engineer Alicia Paz-Solis Noticing Public Comment Period Site Posted Adjacent Owners Newspaper Legal Ad 04/22/2022 to 05/06/2022 04/22/2022 04/22/2022 N/A Advisory Boards Board Date Recommendation Development Review Committee 12/29/2021 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: July 5, 2022 Full application and file of record: Community Development Department, 20 E. Olive St., Bozeman, MT 59715 Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 2 of 13 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 two story mixed-used building with six 2-bedroom units on the second level and commercial space on the bottom floor with off-street surface parking provided within the R-0 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 this 5th day of July, 2022, Anna Bentley, Interim Director of Community Development, or their designees, 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. 4. The Cash-in-lieu Water Rights (CILWR) contribution must be paid to the City in full prior to final plan approval. 5. The applicant must provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder’s office executed Waiver of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SIDs) on City standards record Form. Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 3 of 13 Figure 1: Current Zoning Map Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 4 of 13 Figure 2: Future Land Use Map Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 5 of 13 Figure 3: Proposed site plan Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 6 of 13 Figures 4: Conceptual Renderings Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 7 of 13 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-O, Residential-Office District Yes Comments: Growth Policy: The intent of the Urban Neighborhood District is to: ‘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 mixed use infill development providing residential units as well as commercial services conveniently located adjacent to existing and future residents of Bozeman. Zoning: The intent of the R-O residential-office district is to: “provide for and encourage the development of multi-household and apartment development and compatible professional offices and businesses that would blend well with adjacent land uses. 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. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas characterized by office or multi-household development; and/or areas along arterial corridors or transitional areas between residential neighborhoods and commercial areas.’ The proposal is supporting the intent through the multi-household units with commercial amenities 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 NA Comments: No condominiums are proposed. 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. Submittal requirements 38.220.100 Yes Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 8 of 13 Phasing of development 38.230.020.B No. of phases: NA 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 Mixed use Yes Form and intensity standards 38.320 Zoning: R-O Setbacks (feet) Required Structures Proposed Parking / Loading Yes, with PUD approval Front: (see Block Frontage standards) NA Rear: 20’ 5’ NA Side: 5’ 5’ NA Alley: 5’ NA NA Comments: The project meets the form and intensity standards outlined in 38.320.030 as well as the requirements of the PUD. The side setbacks proposed range from 6.5 feet to 8 feet, satisfying the side setbacks. Per the block frontage standards, the buildings are required to have a 10’ minimum front setback from Ravalli Street. Due to the curve in Ravalli Street, the front setback varies from 26’ to 56’. While Ravalli is the adjacent public right of way, the original PUD created building envelops for the buildings that oriented them internally towards the parking lots where the buildings would gain access. Thus the building is oriented towards the parking lot and what would be considered the rear setback is treated as the front setback, orienting the building internally towards the parking lot and internal site circulation. Lot coverage Proposed: 60% Allowed: Maximum 50% Yes Building height Proposed: 31’ Allowed: 50 (<3:12 pitch) 60’ (>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 NA Comments: The project does not have zone specific provisions, nor fall within an overlay district. General land use standards and requirements 38.350 Yes Comments: The proposal is consistent with the general land use standards and requirements. The building proposes architectural features to encroach into the side setback approximately 1 foot which is allowed per BMC38.350.050.A.2 which allows up to a 2 foot encroachment. 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 Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 9 of 13 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: The applicant provided traffic calculations using the ITE Trip Generation calculator, which estimated 11.01 trips per day for the commercial building space, and 5.81 trips per day for the residential component. This estimate of average daily trips is less than what was originally planned for the PUD. Due to the small number of trips, a traffic impact study waiver was requested by the applicant and approved by the Engineering Department. 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: 4 Yes Fire lanes, curbs, signage and striping Yes Comments: The site gains access from an internal drive network that is part of the original PUD development. The PUD development has four access points, 1 from Ravalli St, 1 from S Ferguson Ave, and 2 from Fallon Street. The closest access from the proposed site to public right of way is Ravalli Street to the north. 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 CIL of water rights (CILWR) Yes Comments: The CILWR is estimated to be $6,751. This fee is required to be confirmed and paid prior to final plan approval. A CILWR determination must be finalized and paid prior to final site plan approval. Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 10 of 13 Municipal infrastructure requirements 38.410.070 NA Comments: NA 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: The project proposed to use the existing regional retention ponds that were approved for the original PUD in 2007. The 2007 Stormwater Design Report accounted for the development on Lot 6. However, there is a small increase of impervious area proposed with the Site Plan than was anticipated with the original report. The applicant provided evidence that the existing storm water facilities were able to handle the increased impervious surface proposed with the development. The stormwater management report has been reviewed and found sufficient by the Engineering Department. 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 (With max density cap) 3.17 units x 0.03 acres/unit = 0.10 acres required @ $2.07/acre Yes Cash donation in lieu (CIL) 38.420.030 Estimated - $901.69 Yes Improvements in-lieu NA Comments: The proposed project has requested to provide cash in lieu (CIL) of parkland. Using the max density required to be mitigated for, this proposal owes for 3.15 dwelling units for 0.03 acres per dwelling unit. This totals 0.10 acres of required parkland which is assessed at $2.07 per acre. The applicant provided a narrative per Resolution 4784 that was reviewed and approved by the Parks Department. The total amount of CIL is estimated to be $901.69. The final amount must be confirmed by the review authority and paid prior to final plan approval. 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 Mixed/ Landscape block frontage Yes Departure criteria None NA Comments: The project faces Ravalli Street to the north, an internal drive to the west, and parking lot to the south. Ravalli Street to the north is a mixed block frontage, and the applicant has chosen to apply the landscape Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 11 of 13 standards. The project is meeting the requirements for the landscape block frontage and is requesting no departures. Building placement: The buildings are required to have a 10’ minimum front setback from Ravalli Street. Due to the curve in Ravalli Street, the front setback varies from 26’ to 56’. Building entrances: The building has entrances that are visible and directly accessible from Ravalli Street. The PUD orients the buildings towards the parking lot. So the design of the building has faced entries toward the parking Façade transparency: Both the south and west façade are required to have at least 25% of the ground floor between 4’ – 8’ above the sidewalk and are both exceeding the minimum requirement. Weather Protection: All building entrances have provided weather protection of at least 3’ in depth. Parking location: The parking is all located to the rear of the building and was constructed with the original Ridge PUD development. Landscaping: The area between the street and building is a combination of landscaping (adjacent to the sidewalk), and pedestrian oriented space adjacent to the building. Sidewalk width: A 5’ sidewalk is already provided along Ravalli Street. 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 and internal pedestrian network via a pedestrian sidewalk. 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 new internal roadways are proposed. The original PUD accounted for internal pedestrian and vehicular movement. The system is found to still be adequate, thus no new improvements are necessary. On-site open space 38.520.060 Yes Total required 900sf Yes Total provided 900sf Yes Comments: The project has 6 units total, of which all require 150 square feet of open space which totals 900 square feet. The open space is provided through a combination of balconies (on northern units), and common shared open space. The common shared open space is centrally located and appropriately screened. Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 12 of 13 7d. Conformance with Article 5 – Parking (38.540) Meets Code? Parking requirements 38.540.050 Yes Parking requirements residential 38.540.050.A.1 12 required Reductions residential 38.540.050.A.1.b NA Parking requirements nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2 26 spaces Reductions nonresidential 38.540.050.A.2.c NA Provided off-street 41 Provided on-street 0 Bicycle parking 38.540.050.A.4 4 required Yes Comments: There are 26 parking spaces required to serve the commercial businesses, and another 12 required to serve the residential units, totaling 38 required spaces for the entire project. The original PUD designated 41 spaces for this lot, thus satisfying the minimum parking requirements. 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 were provided with the original PUD. No changes are proposed or required. The building service areas have a low wall for screening and landscaping. 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: Façade articulation is provided through windows, entries, and change in building material (including texture and color). The proposed building material includes a base primarily composed of steel metal siding with the second story a combination of fiber cement panel and wood-look foil wrapped aluminum. There are no proposed walls that meet the definition of a blank wall and require blank wall treatment. The building design meets standards and is sufficient. 7e. Conformance with Article 5 – Landscaping (38.550) Meets Code? Mandatory landscaping requirements 38.550.050 Yes 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 with a minimum of 80% drought tolerant plants proposed, adequate irrigation plan, and street trees. Staff Report Ridge PUD Lot 6 Site Plan Application 21461 June 30, 2022 Page 13 of 13 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: A lighting photometric plan was submitted and found and reviewed and is found to be sufficient. 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 April 22 through May 6, 2022. No public comment was received. To the north, within the 200 feet radius is a condominium neighborhood. The applicant was provided guidance from the City that, based on BMC 38.220.420, ‘the applicant must provide a list of names and addresses of all property owners, including names and addresses of owners of individual condominiums, wholly or partially within 200 feet of the site’, thus only effected parties were provided notice, not the entire neighborhood that falls outside of the 200 feet boundary. 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.