Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-10-28 Minutes, City CommissionMINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA October 28, 2002 The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, on Monday, October 28, 2002, at 3:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Steve Kirchhoff, Commissioner Marcia Youngman, Commissioner Jarvis Brown, Commissioner Andrew Cetraro, City Manager Clark Johnson, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell, Planning Director Andy Epple, Staff Attorney Tim Cooper and Clerk of the Commission Robin Sullivan. Commissioner Lee Hietala was absent. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. None of the Commissioners requested that any of the Consent Items be removed for discussion. Authorize absence of Commissioner Hietala from this meeting It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that Commissioner Hietala's absence from this meeting be approved. The motion carried bythe following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Minutes - January 18, 2000, and May 13, October 2, October 8, and October 21, 2002 It was moved by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Cetraro, that the minutes of the meeting of October 8, 2002, be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Mayor Kirchhoff deferred action on the minutes of the meetings of January 18, 2000, and May 13, October 2, and October 21, 2002, to a later date. Consent Items City Manager Johnson presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Acknowledge receipt of staff report - request for annexation of 0.7043 acre described as a portion of Parcel A, COS No. 1328A (north side of Remington Way, west of South 19th Avenue) - Evangelical Free Church Commission Resolution No. 3555 - intent to annex 0.7043 acre described as a portion of Parcel A, COS No. 1328A (north side of Remington Way, west of South 19th Avenue); set public hearing for November 25, 2002 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3555 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, THE INHABITANTS THEREOF AND THE INHABITANTS OF A TRACT OF LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN, AND HEREIN MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED, TO EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID CONTIGUOUS TRACT WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS THEREOF. 10-28-2002 -2- Authorize Mayor to sign - Notice of Filing of City Commission Decision - approval of variance to allow photovoltaic array to encroach 14 feet into required front yard setback and 2 feet into required side yard setback on Lot 1, Block 3, University Subdivision (Foster) (C-02006) Authorize Mayor to sign - Findings of Fact and Order - denial of Major Site Plan with Certificate of Appropriateness requested by TriStar Communications to allow development of 180-foot-tall telecommunications tower with associated support equipment on Lot 2, Tract 7, Gardner-Simmental Plaza (Lux Tower, 145 Simmental Way) (Z-02143) Approval of Depository Bonds and Pledged Securities as of September 30, 2002, as reviewed by Commissioner Cetraro and Commissioner Youngman Claims Itwas moved by Commissioner Cetraro, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Commission approve the Consent Items as listed, and authorize and direct the appropriate persons to complete the necessary actions. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Request for modification of conditions for approval of Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development to allow construction of one 18-unit and three 12-unit apartment buildings on Tracts 5-7, Mountain Vista Subdivision, to allow for a total of 66 units rather than the 54 units previously approved - Springer Group Architects for Dave MacDonald (Brookside Park Apartments II, 2100 West College Avenue) (Z-01126A) Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Assistant Planner Jami Morris forwarding the request to increase the number of units from 54 to 66 in the previously approved Brookside Park Apartments II. Assistant Planner Jami Morris presented the staff report. She reminded the Commissioners that the Brookside Park Apartments are located along the north side of West College Street between South 20th Avenue and South 23rd Avenue. This apartment complex has been constructed under the planned unit development, and a total of eighteen units are included in Phase I. Phase II of the project was approved with 54 units to be constructed in four buildings and included relaxations of the parking requirements. She stated that the apartments in Phase I and those proposed for Phase II were two and three-bedroom units. Under this application, many of the apartments in Phase II would be constructed as one-bedroom units. As a result, the applicant is requesting that he be allowed to increase the number of living units from 54 to 66 within this phase. She stated that staff has reviewed this requested modification and found that the project will still meet parking requirements and open space requirements; and once the zone code amendment eliminating maximum densities in the various zoning districts has been enacted, it will meet that requirement. She concluded by forwarding staff's recommendation for approval, subject to the condition that building permits not be issued until after the zone code amendments have become effective. Mr. Dave MacDonald, applicant, stated that under the requested modification the site will not be changed to any great extent; in fact, the building footprints will be smaller than initially proposed. He noted that there is currently a big demand for one and two-bedroom units, and this modification would help to meet that demand as well as provide some more affordable units in the community. He concluded by requesting that he be allowed to obtain building permits for the first two buildings prior to the effective date of the zone code amendments. Mr. Lowell Springer, architect representing the applicant, stated that the decreased footprints will result in more open space on the site, and the new parking requirements will be met. He then noted that the configuration of the fourth building on this site will be determined by the amount of space available and current community needs. 10-28-2002 -3- Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Assistant Planner Morris indicated staffwould support Mr. MacDonald's requested modification to the recommended condition. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that the request for modification of the conditions for approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development, as requested by Springer Group Architects for Dave MacDonald under Application No. Z-01126A, to allow for a total of 66 units rather than the 54 units previously approved, be approved subject to the following condition: That the building permits for Building Nos. 1 and 2 be issued upon submittal of an application for those permits and completion of the necessary steps, with the building permit for Building 3 not being issued until after the zone code amendment removing density limitations has been enacted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Recognition of International Visitor Mayor Kirchhoffwelcomed Francesco Sciortino, Consul General of Italy, to Bozeman and presented him with a Certificate of Honorary Citizenship and a book. Consul General Sciortino stated he is based in San Francisco and has made a commitment to visit all of the states in his jurisdiction. He is in Bozeman to participate in opening of the Compasso d'Oro exhibit, noting that it joins art with industry and practicality. He then thanked the Commission for the opportunity to participate in this meeting. Informal review - proposal to demolish existing Town Pump facility at 2607 West Main Street and construct new building which houses a convenience food store with on-premises alcohol consumption and gaming room, automatic carwash facility, and canopy and pump islands- Soringer Group Architects (I-02032) Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Associate Planner/Urban Designer Candace Honatke, forwarding the proposal. Associate Planner Honatke provided a brief overview of the proposal to demolish the existing Town Pump facility and carwash and to construct a new building which contains a convenience food store and a new canopy and pump islands. She noted that the applicant has entered into an agreement to purchase the lot immediately to the west of the subject site, and the site is to be reconfigured, with a two-stall car wash to be located on the western portion. She indicated that offices for the business are to be located on the second floor of the building, and the applicant also proposes a gaming room and on-site consumption of alcohol on the main level of the new building. She reminded the Commission that this type of use has not been supported in the past, particularly in the entryway overlay corridor. Responding to Commissioner Brown, the Associate Planner stated that staff supports the proposed reconstruction but finds that the on-premises consumption of alcohol conflicts with the sale of fuel. Mr. Lowell Springer, architect representing the applicant, stated he feels the areas of concern identified by staff can all be addressed. He noted that the subject site, which lies within the West Main Street entryway corridor, has been a problem for quite some time, and past efforts to upgrade it have been unsuccessful. He indicated that this new plan, which includes tearing down all of the existing facilities and constructing a complete new facility, seems to be the best way lo improve the site. He posted a new conceptual plan that includes pointed gables rather than the rounded gables in the plan that was included in the Commissioners' packets. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, Mr. Springer stated they have two key questions on which theywould like Commission feedback. First, he noted that the existing site has two accesses and the property to the west 10-28-2002 -4- has one access. He stated the Montana Department of Transportation has indicated it would not require the closure of any of the three accesses, and asked if the Commission would support those three accesses. He also asked the Commissioners to address the issue of combining the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages with the sale of fuel, reminding them of the opportunity for people to purchase gas and alcoholic beverages for off-premises consumption at the same time. Mr. Bruce AIIred, casino operations manager for Town Pump, submitted to the Commission a copy of the policy and procedures manual for their operations. He stated their company has piloted this unique program in Montana and has four of the six certified trainers in Montana for the Training for Intervention Procedures (TIPS) program. He noted that every employee is required to complete this course and the company has a zero tolerance policy for alcohol violations. He stated this program is successfully used in over sixty Town Pump facilities around the state and has received letters of support from various law enforcement agencies. Commissioner Youngman voiced her desire to take this policy to the recently-formed Alcohol Policy Council for their review and comment. Responding to questions from the Commission, Mr. Brian Enger, development manager, stated that they have not thought about the name for the gaming area, but it would probably be called Lucky Lil's or Magic Diamond and have fourteen machines. He stressed that the facility would not have a bar, but would have a gaming room and a cage from which employees would serve alcoholic beverages to those sitting at the machines. Mr. AIIred stated this type of set-up helps Town Pump control the amount of alcohol consumed. He then indicated that for every gallon of beer they serve an average of 25 gallons of coffee and pop. Commissioner Youngman stated she cannot provide input on the proposed access points until she receives feedback from the City's professional staff. She noted that on West Main Street people average 55 miles per hour, in spite of the 45-mile-an-hour speed limit; and she recognizes the number of access points can impact traffic safety. Mayor Kirchhoff noted that Main Street is a highway, but it is located in an urban environment. He characterized the proposed design as a highway model, and not convenient to the urban scape in which it is located. He suggested that its size be decreased and that the "long airline runway" canopy be broken or reconfigured to provide some interest. He indicated his preference for the current design, which places the building closer to the street. He then stated he is unsure of the signage and deferred any comment regarding access until he receives input from the professional staff. He concluded by encouraging the applicant to warm the site, to make it more human scale, to make it more interesting, and to bring the building closer to the street. Commissioner Brown stated he shares the Mayor's concerns regarding the site plan. He suggested that nine islands are excessive and questioned whether there is adequate space between the proposed car wash and the pump area. Commissioner Youngman stated she prefers the rounded canopies with glass panels behind to the fake gables on the new plan. She then concurred with the Mayor's comments regarding relocation of the building. At the Mayor's request, the Commissioners turned their attention to on-site consumption. Commissioner Youngman stated she feels this is an inappropriate effort to locate a casino in an entryway, on a site immediately adjacent to a residential area with predominantly elderly residents. She noted that she cannot support combining drinking and gambling adjacent to a neighborhood, although limiting the hours of operation could help to address the resulting conflicts. She voiced appreciation for the training program that has been implemented and finds it is a step in the right direction, but she cannot support combining drinking, gaming and selling gas at the same facility. Mayor Kirchhoff stated the public record shows that the community is sensing that it has a problem with alcohol consumption and that the issue has not been adequately addressed. As a result, a task force has been formed to address the issue; and he feels this request goes in the opposite direction of where the community is going. 10-28-2002 -5- Commissioner Brown stated he recently opposed what is essentially a casino on East Main Street next to a residential area, although that casino did receive the majority vote needed for approval. He noted that proposal did not seem appropriate, and he finds that adding gas sales makes this application even less appropriate. He expressed appreciation for the company's training program and the efforts to improve the appearance of this site, but he finds the combined uses not appropriate. Commissioner Cetraro stated that the policy and procedures implemented by the company help ensure responsible behavior, and he feels it is a step in the right direction. He then noted that new insurance policy requirements for this type of business help to assure that type of behavior. Responding to questions from Mr. Springer, Commissioner Youngman indicated that when the Commission adopted the zone code amendment regarding casinos, she recognized the potential that businesses would be requesting fourteen machines but she was in the minority. She then stated that the name of the facility and the signage are critical, noting that the logo for what is typically a casino would be inappropriate. She then indicated that, since this would be considered under the conditional use process, the possible conflicts of gambling and drinking adjacent to a residential neighborhood and in an entryway overlay corridor must be adequately addressed. Responding to questions from City Manager Johnson, Mr. Brian Enger stated there is room for stacking six or seven cars between the car wash and the street. Mayor Kirchhoff thanked the applicant for the opportunity to conduct this informal review. Discussion - FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1) Agenda for the County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 29, at the Belgrade City Hall. (2) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, October 29, at the Professional Building. (3) Agenda for the Zoning Commission meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, October 29, in the Conference Room. (4) City Manager Johnson submitted the following. (1) Stated the City has now closed on the Love Lane property. He noted that the site contains a house, which he plans to have HRDC rent out as an affordable house, and a shop which the seller will use until May 1,2003. (2) Stated that the City and School District are working cooperatively to pave additional parking on the west side of the Swim Center. (3) Announced that the Recreation Department has requested authorization to install a big slide on the south end of Bogert Pool. (5) Planning Director Epple stated that a facilitated meeting on the Town and Country proposal was held on Tuesday evening. He noted the group was larger than typically desired for a facilitated process but he feels it was a good meeting. Commissioner Youngman stated the feedback she received is that the developer was "calling the shots" at the meeting and suggested that is an issue that needs to be addressed. She then noted that, when setting up the process, the Commission agreed that the minutes from these meetings would list the areas of agreement but not the areas where no agreement was reached. She stated this does not alert the Commission to areas of issue or concern and suggested that the notes also include outstanding issues. Planning Director Epple recognized that some projects have not entered into the facilitated meeting process early enough, and that has caused some concerns from all parties involved. (6) Staff Attorney Cooper distributed copies of the draft ordinance being considered bythe Zoning Commission at tomorrow night's special meeting. 10-28-2002 -6- Planning Director Epple stated that staff's recommendation for approval means that staff has looked at the ordinance to ensure it does not conflict with any other aspects of the code and will not create any problems if adopted. Responding to Commissioner Brown, the Planning Director indicated that the fees seem to be comparable to those identified for WalMart and Home Depot. (7) Mayor Kirchhoff reviewed the process to be followed during this evening's meeting, noting the Commission has previously decided to accept written comment until 5:00 p.m. on Friday, November 1, and to make a decision at the November 12 meeting. Commissioner Youngman stated that the economic analysis has not yet been posted on the web. She then suggested that cards be made available so people can write down questions if they wish. City Manager Johnson asked that, at the end of the meeting, the Commissioners identify those questions for which theywould like answers prior to making a decision, so that staff knows what the key issues are. Recess - 4:30 p.m. Mayor Kirchhoff recessed the meeting at 4:30 p.m., to reconvene at 7:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn for the purpose of conducting the public hearings and public interest items. Reconvene - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kirchhoff reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. in the Gallatin Room at the Holiday Inn. Public hearing - Commission Resolution No. 3550 - intent to create Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) No. 672 (Cattail Creek Subdivision, Phase I) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the intent to create Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) No. 672, as established by Commission Resolution No. 3550, entitled: COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3550 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 672 (CATTAIL CREEK, PHASE I) DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO CREATE THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTALLING AND MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS FOR INSTALLATION, RENTAL, MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. City Manager Clark Johnson noted one of the conditions for approval of the preliminary plat for Cattail Creek Subdivision, Phase I, was that the developer petition for the creation of a special improvement lighting district. That petition has been submitted, and Commission Resolution No. 3550 set this as the time for the public hearing on the intent to create the district. No one was present to speak in support of or in opposition to the requested district, and no written protest had been timely received. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public hearing. 10-28-2002 -7- It was moved by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Cetraro, that staff be directed to bring back a resolution creating Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) No. 672. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Public hearing - Commission Resolution No. 3551 - intent to create Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) No. 673 (Harvest Creek Subdivision, Phase V) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the intent to create Special Improvement Lighting District (SlLD) No. 673, as established by Commission Resolution No. 3551, entitled: COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3551 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 673 (HARVEST CREEK SUBDIVISION, PHASE V); DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO CREATE THE DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTALLING AND MAINTAINING LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS AND ASSESSING THE COSTS FOR INSTALLATION, RENTAL, MAINTENANCE AND ENERGY THEREFOR TO BENEFITTED PROPERTY BY THE LEVY OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. City Manager Clark Johnson noted one of the conditions for approval of the preliminary plat for Harvest Creek Subdivision, Phase V, was that the developer petition for the creation of a special improvement lighting district. That petition has been submitted, and Commission Resolution No. 3551 set this as the time for the public hearing on the intent to create the district. The City Manager then noted that, included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Assistant Planner Karin Caroline, dated October 24, 2002, forwarding an amended diagram for installation of lights and a request that the number of light fixtures within the district be decreased from thirteen to eight. He noted that the initial number of lights proposed would result in lighting at the level found in Ferguson Meadows Subdivision; the decreased numberwill bring the lighting into conformance with the recently approved revisions to the lighting standards contained in the subdivision regulations. No one was present to speak in support of or in opposition to the requested district, and no written protest had been timely received. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Cetraro, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that staff be directed to bring back a resolution creating Special Improvement Lighting District (SILD) No. 673, decreasing the number of light fixtures from thirteen to eight. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Public comment - proposed siting of solid waste transfer station Mayor Kirchhoff announced that the Commission intends to accept oral testimony at this time and will keep the period for written testimony open until 5:00 p.m. on Friday, November 1. He stressed that the testimony must be received by the Clerk of the Commission by that deadline. He then indicated that the Commission will be scheduled to make a decision at the meeting to be held on Tuesday, November 12. Project Engineer Karen Finke reviewed manyof the questions which were raised bythe Commission at last week's meeting and provided brief responses to those questions. She noted that on April 27, 2000, the Commission received a solid waste alternative studythat identified four options. At that time, the Commission directed staff to pursue the possibility of a transfer station rather than constructing a new cell at the landfill. 10-28-2002 -8- A consulting engineer was subsequently selected and the process of identifying potential sites was undertaken. In that process, twelve sites were reviewed and narrowed to the three under consideration at this time. She indicated that neighborhood meetings were recently held on each of those sites; and this is the final opportunity for public input into the selection process. The Project Engineer stated that the City started landfilling in the early 1900s and began its collection services in the late 1940s. The former landfill is located at the end of North Rouse Avenue and was used until the late 1960s. The City purchased the 200 acres on Story Mill Road where the landfill is presently located in the late 1960s, and the new lined cell has an estimated remaining life of one year. Options for extending that life expectancywould be to limit the garbage received to city residents only, which would double the remaining life, and possibly to use steeper side slopes in the cell. Project Engineer Finke noted that the City began recycling of white goods in 1990 and became one of the initial parties in the Headwaters Recycling Program in 1997, with ten recycling sites throughout the community. Also, yard wastes are composted at the landfill, with compost and mulch now being sold. She indicated that once the landfill is closed, the collection trucks will go to the transfer station, but it is anticipated the recycling operations will remain at the landfill. Mr. Erik Colville, SCS Engineers, stated the economic feasibility study is designed to aid in selecting a site for cost effective, convenient solid waste disposal. He reviewed the bases for the study, noting it includes an estimated annual population growth rate of 2.1 percent and recognizes that the amount of garbage generated is directly related to population. He indicated that the figures in the report are based on the estimated 77,000 tons of garbage that will be generated in ten years. He noted that the transfer station, on whichever of the three sites, will be approximately 15,000 square feet in size and will have the same features, including a no fee recycle area, a scale facility and a re-use area. He showed the typical layout of a transfer station, which includes a floor on which the garbage is dumped and then pushed into a trailer that has been parked on the lower level. He stated a yard tractor is used to maneuver the trailers around the transfer station site, and large over-the-road trucks are used to haul the trailers to the landfill site. Mr. Colville turned his attention to the conceptual cost estimates, stressing that they are based on the same assumptions and that it is critical that they be considered comparatively. He identified the unique aspects for each site, beginning with the Love Lane site. Those aspects include installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Love Lane and Huffine Lane, addition of a westbound right-turn lane and a westbound acceleration lane, paving 600 feet of Love Lane, drilling of a domesticwater well, installation of a wastewater holding tank and two wastewater systems, and a berm and landscaping around three sides of the station. The total development costs are estimated at $4,417,000 and annual transfer and haul costs at $1.3 million. Mr. Colville next addressed the Griffin Drive site, noting the unique aspects for the site include installation of traffic signals at the intersections of Griffin Drive with Manley Road and Bridger Drive, and purchase of the land. He estimated the total development costs at $5,233,000 and the annual transfer and haul costs at $1.2 million. Finally, Mr. Colville forwarded the estimates for the Story Mill Road site. Unique aspects for the site include installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Bridger Drive and Griffin Drive, construction of a new bridge over Bridger Creek, paving 3300 feet of road, and installation of a berm around the station. The estimated development costs total $4.3 million and the annual transfer and haul costs total $1.4 million. He concluded by noting that, when the development costs are spread over a twenty-year period and added to the annual costs, the results are figures in the Iow $2 million range for each of the three sites. Mr. Erik Colville concluded by characterizing these figures as essentially the same. He then reviewed the costs of having the City's collection trucks return to the Story Mill Road site each night if the transfer station is located elsewhere, noting those estimates show a cost of $20,000 a year from the Love Lane site and $5,000 a year from the Griffin Drive site. He also identified some of the costs of not constructing a transfer station and indicated that direct hauling to the Logan landfill would cost $3.7 million annually versus the Iow $2 million range. In addition, a transfer station helps to minimize illegal dumping, provides a potential for waste diversion, minimizes impacts on the road system, and provides flexibility in selecting a final disposal site. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, Mr. Colville stated that a transfer station is a necessary part of a county-wide solid waste district unless the county-wide disposal site is located very close to the largest population concentration, which is Bozeman. He noted most jurisdictions that lose a landfill build a transfer 10-28-2002 9- station because it provides the option of choosing the best location for disposal. He concluded by indicating that the siting of a transfer station for Bozeman is independent of the creation of a county-wide solid waste district. The Mayor opened the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Jim Monger, 21 Chris Court, stated there are obvious and serious fatal flaws in considering the Love Lane site. He stressed that this site is not within city limits and, given the existing road system and traffic problems in that area, he does not believe the County Commission would approve a transfer station at that location. Ms. Betty Stroock, 1350 Story Mill Road, read into the record her lengthy letter expressing concerns and opposition to the idea of locating a transfer station at the existing landfill site. She noted that she owns 250 feet of roadway about a half mile south of the landfill and has had garbage strewn across her property from passing vehicles for the past seven years. She is also subjected to the noise of heavy truck traffic grinding up the hill and has concerns for her family's safety as those same trucks whiz back past her house. She suggested that the intent to close the landfill has been part of the City's policy for at least ten years, although any references to such policy have been verbal. She stated that the potential of having the landfill closed when the existing cell is filled, only to be replaced by a transfer station, is "disingenuous at best." She stated the existing landfill site, which is located in the northeast corner of Bozeman in a fast-growing residential neighborhood, is not an appropriate location for a transfer station. She also cautioned that Story Mill Road is not designed to carry the heavy truck traffic that would be generated by a transfer station. She concluded by stating that none of the three sites under consideration is appropriate for a transfer station and suggesting that it should be located as close as possible to North 19th Avenue and Interstate 90. Ms. Wren Bade, 304 South 9th Avenue, stated that, as a mother of three children, she feels it is important to consider the impacts of one's actions on futUre generations and, as leaders of the community, the Commissioners have the choice of following a sustainable path. She noted the community lacks recycling opportunities for items such as fabric and wood, and suggested that as much as 80 percent of the garbage could be recycled. She concluded by encouraging the City to research other options instead of constructing a transfer station at this time. Mr. Peter Bennett, 5595 Love Lane, stated he takes exception to the feasibility study because it does not take into consideration the loss of property values for those homes near the proposed site. He noted that if the impact is to flatten the property values for five years, the result will be a loss of $55,000 on a $200,000 house, based on the five-percent increase per year that was quoted in Sunday's paper, or a total of $440,000 for the eight houses that would be affected. He noted that the newsletter recently distributed by the City stated the committee tried to site the transfer station away from residential neighborhoods, which he views as an acknowledgment that it will have significant impacts on property values. He concluded by asking the Commissioners to not locate the transfer station on Love Lane. Mr. Dennis Cartwright, 3121 Augusta Drive, stated that, to compare the costs of the three sites accurately, the acquisition costs for the landfill site should be included. He then asked what kind of tax base would be generated if the landfill site were sold for a housing development. Ms. Mary Alice Chandler, 3110 Augusta Drive, characterized Augusta Drive as a wonderful place to live, with homes of various values and sizes. She noted a question has been raised about the potential of the City cooperating with the County on solid waste issues, and suggested that is a better approach than "plopping a transfer station in a populated area." She voiced concern that, during the last meeting on this issue, the projected number of truck trips per day mushroomed and asked if a firm number has been identified. Ms. Robin Jarvis, 5595 Love Lane, stated it is 48 feet from the front of her house to the street, and her driveway is directly across the road from where trucks would be turning into the transfer station site. She indicated that, after researching transfer stations, the neighbors in this area are definitely dissatisfied with such a facility being constructed on the potential site. She urged the Cityto pursue more composting and curbside recycling options and to wait until the solid waste task force has forwarded its recommendations. She stated there are flaws in the rating system that has been used for the sites, and she is not sure that any of the three sites is the best choice. She concluded by submitting 31 additional signatures in opposition to a solid waste transfer station on Love Lane and copies of information downloaded from the web. 10-28-2002 10- Mr. Rick Kerin, consulting engineer representing LarryVosti, stated his client has purchased property along Manley Road that has been annexed and rezoned and is currently being developed as Gallatin Park Commercial Subdivision and River Run Planned Unit Development, a residential development. He voiced concern that those property values will be adversely affected by the siting of a transfer station on Griffin Drive. He is concerned about environmental issues because of the high groundwater in the area and its proximityto sensitive lands and a recreational area, as well as odors and trash. He encouraged the Commission to give favorable consideration to a transfer station at the existing landfill site, characterizing that as the logical thing to do. Mr. Bob Walls, 3210 Augusta Drive, noted the Bridger Creek Subdivision is a relatively new subdivision within city limits. He stated that approximately 200 homes are currently occupied, with another 50 to be built, and the tax base will be well over $50 million. He stated that purchasers in that subdivision have been assured by builders, real estate agents and the PLI zoning that the landfill would be closed and used for parkland or open space. He noted that traffic is very congested in the area and that the existing roads and bridges are not adequate or suitable for today's traffic. He urged the Commission to consider hauling directly to Logan and to continue searching for a suitable site if none of the three now under consideration are considered appropriate. He concluded by questioning why the costs of self hauling are included in the figures submitted since they do not represent costs to the taxpayers. Ms. Karin Jennings, 1075 Boylan Road, President of the Bridger Creek Homeowners' Association, spoke on behalf of the Association. She urged the Commissioners to not select the Story Mill Road site, and indicated support for Mr. Wall's comments. Mr. Christopher Graft, 3128 Augusta Drive, noted it seems that all three sites under consideration border a residential area and will negatively impact that area. He suggested that city residents would be willing to pay a little additional to have the transfer station located away from populated areas. He concluded by noting that, if the City chooses a site close to a populated area, it can probably expect litigation, which would be a costly and time-consuming process. Mrs. Susan Ault, 2520 Baxter Lane, voiced concern that many of those traveling to a transfer station site on Love Lane would not use Huffine Lane, but would use Baxter Lane and Durston Road instead. She cautioned that Baxter Lane is a gravel road with limited visibility and on which agricultural equipment is often found. Mr. Peter Rugheimer, 1404 Story Mill Road, asked what number of residences was used when the sites were considered, noting there are 250 homes in Bridger Creek Subdivision. He also asked if the City currently owns the Love Lane site and, if so, why the costs of that site are used while the costs of the Story Mill site are not. He submitted his written testimony to the Commission, briefly reviewing that testimony. He noted that the special newsletter prepared by the City states the transfer station would flatten residential values for five years, and he finds that having hundreds of homeowners incurring no growth over five years is unacceptable. He stated the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan land use map shows the land adjacent to the landfill as urban while the land around the Griffin Drive site is industrial. Also, he noted that the landfill property can be sold for more if it doesn't overlook a transfer station. He reminded the Commission that the task force reviewed and ranked the various sites and concluded that the landfill was the last appropriate; and the economic feasibility study reflects essentially the same cost for each of the three sites, with no land acquisition cost for the Story Mill Road site included. He concluded his presentation by encouraging the Commissioners to give favorable consideration to the Griffin Drive site. Mrs. Jeannie Counce, 846 East Baxter Road, stated that traffic is a universal concern for all the sites. She noted that Love Lane is a gravel road, and the roads in that immediate area are all gravel agricultural roads with few street signs. She noted that the City and BFI haulers say they will only use Huffine Lane and Jackrabbit Lane; however, she stated many private users will travel the back roads. She also questioned who would pay for the eventual paving of those roads. Mrs. Susan Swimley, 207 McAdow Avenue, asked the Commissioners to consider other options, not just the three sites under consideration. She recognized that Bozeman is the population center of the valley; however, she noted the County is moving toward the formation of a consolidated solid waste district and suggested that the City consider the possibility of participating in a transfer station for the County that may be located closer to Belgrade. She suggested that the ideal site would be close to the Interstate and close to the 10-28-2002 11 - railroad, particularly since it is important to remember that the Logan landfill may not be open forever. She encouraged the Commissioners to take the lead and put some momentum behind the County's efforts and to make the right decision on the transfer station for the long term, not just the short term. Mr. Doug Ritter, 5122 Love Lane, expressed concurrence with Mrs. Swimley's comments. He noted that the Love Lane site is ten miles from the Interstate, while the Griffin Drive site is a half mile from the Interstate and is adjacent to the railroad tracks. He also noted that Griffin Drive is designed to carry heavy traffic. Furthermore, Love Lane is not a dedicated road, which could raise additional issues. Mr. Ritter stated that he used the rating system on Cooper Park and found that it rated higher than some of the sites under consideration. He reminded the Commission that the County Commission is adamantly opposed to the Love Lane site and suggested that the Commissioners recognize that none of the three sites under consideration may be appropriate. Mr. Charles Bowen, 3070 Mcllhattan Road, encouraged the Commissioners to go back to the site selection process and the ratings of the various sites. He noted that the Griffin Drive site did quite well on those ratings while the landfill did very poor. Also, he noted that the economic analysis has revealed the landfill site is the most expensive because of the needed road improvements. Mr. Jeff Krauss, 508 Park Place, asked if the cost estimates for improvements to Story Mill Road include increasing visibility at the intersection of Story Mill Road with Mcllhattan Road and the road that leads to Lyman Creek. He noted that at the present time, the intersection lies at the bottom of a steep hill, and it is not possible to see traffic coming from the north. Mr. Ric Plante, 5535 Love Lane, noted that the site is estimated to last thirty to forty years. He questioned whether the City trucks would be stored at the landfill nightly if $20,000 could be saved annually by storing them at the transfer station site. He then asked if the City has looked at its own property, including the old landfill site on North Rouse Avenue. He also stressed the importance of recognizing that the Griffin Drive site is adjacent to the railroad tracks. He questioned whether the Love Lane site is within the entryway corridor and, if so, if it needs to meet those restrictions. He then forwarded his contention that the rating system is flawed, particularly since the Recreation Complex scored over 800 points when he evaluated it. He concluded by stressing that Love Lane will need improvement, even though it is paved, because it is not designed to carry heavy truck traffic. Mr. Charles Page, 5320 Love Lane, suggested that the transportation costs for hauling from the Love Lane site to the Logan landfill could be substantially higher than estimated due to the frequent stops that could result because of all the development along Jackrabbit Lane. He recognized that Bozeman is large and has a big impact on the surrounding area, but he questioned whether the City has the right to tell those outside city limits what they will live next to. He stated other sites are readily available and stressed that, because of the negative impacts on property values, a site not adjacent to residential development should be considered. He then concluded by encouraging the Commission to consider other options, rather than choosing one of the three sites under consideration. Mr. Russell Vance, 5130 Love Lane, stated that the County Road Superintendent has indicated that if the Love Lane site were selected, the City would be required to not only improve the intersection of Love Lane with Huffine Lane, but to also improve Baxter Road, Love Lane and Durston Road. He cautioned that, since those roads are located in right-of-way not owned by the County and since the City has no right to condemn county property, it would be extremely difficult to make those improvements. He concluded by questioning whether a minimum of seven acres is needed for a transfer station, suggesting that some of the smaller sites previously eliminated might be viable options. Break - 9:00 to 9:10 p.m. Mayor Kirchhoff declared a break from 9:00 a.m. to 9:10 a.m., in accordance with Commission policy. 10-28-2002 12- Public comment (continued) - proposed siting of solid waste transfer station Mr. Chris Counce, 846 East Baxter Road, stated he feels the impacts on roads north of the Love Lane site have been seriously underestimated. He recognized the City's ability to take advantage of unzoned property in the county and voiced frustration that those county residents have no say at the ballot box. He concluded by stating the Love Lane site is unacceptable. Mr. Robert Leamon, 710 East Aspen Street, stressed the importance of recognizing that the costs for all of the three sites are virtually the same, particularly when the estimated difference is a very small percentage of the total. He stated that a very large number of people will benefit from a transfer station while a small number of people will suffer. He then stated that recycling opportunities in the community"leave a lot to be desired." Mr. Brian Gertiser, 1010 East Olive Street, stated he does not care where the transfer station is sited; his concern is that the City seems to be in a rush to do it. He urged the Commissioners to slow down and to take the opportunity to work with the County. He suggested that, rather than selecting one of these three sites, the City work with the County and find a site "in the middle of nowhere." Mr. Ted Williams, 1757 Highland Boulevard, stated he owns the property at 5499 Love Lane, where his grandchildren live. He is concerned about their safety in crossing the road to get the mail. He indicated that the Love Lane site is not suitable, and he is also concerned about decreased property values. As a civil engineer, he complimented the engineering team that prepared the economic feasibility report. He asked, however, why self haul costs were included but not impacts on property values since both of those are private monies. Mr. Dale Gillespie, real estate agent representing Larry Vosti, questioned if the task force considered the 1,000 adults that will be located between Griffin Drive and the East Gallatin River when the River Run PUD is completed, in addition to the 300,000 square feet of light industrial buildings to be located in the Gallatin Park Commercial Subdivision. He voiced concern that the traffic impacts that a transfer station would have on Manley Road would be inappropriate, particularly in light of that pending development. Ms. Laura Thompson, 3114 Augusta Drive, noted that testimony tonight reflects the high number of residents near the Love Lane and Story Mill Road sites. She stated that only one developer near the Griffin Road site has been represented at this meeting and suggested this reflects the population densities of the various areas. Mrs. Joyce Nelson, 780 Manley Road, stated she would be affected by the Griffin Drive site. She voiced concern that the water from washing down the transfer station would go into the East Gallatin Recreation Area, where many children swim. She also questioned how the transfer station, maintenance building, recycling facilities, large trucks and trailers, and personal vehicles will all fit on the site. She noted that Mergenthaler Transfer has vehicles moving in and out of its site all day long, and the ambulance service often rolls on emergency calls. She concluded by asking the Commissioners to rethink the possibility of locating a transfer station in this area and noting that those who now live near the landfill knew they were moving in next to a landfill. Mr. Joe Polus, 5039 Love Lane, noted that the rating criteria did not include enough weight for residential impacts, and the economic feasibility study lacks a lot of information. He noted that in his written testimony, he identified the Griffin Drive site as the least of three evils. He then voiced his concurrence with Mrs. Swimley's comments and urged the Commission to step back and reconsider the options, looking at other sites and working with the County to address solid waste issues on a county-wide basis. Mr. Pete Ault, 2520 Baxter Lane, suggested that the Commission use the information provided by SCS Engineers and develop more refined cost estimates for the three sites under consideration. He encouraged the Commissioners to not make a decision in haste, suggesting that the decision could be delayed until January. He asked the Commissioners to look once again at the Idaho Pole site, suggesting it could be an ideal site for a transfer station. Mr. Darrell Bowman, 1054 Caddie Court, stated he purchased a lot in Phase III of Bridger Creek Subdivision in April 2000, the same month that the issue of a transfer station was raised. He stated that, until 10-28-2002 13- he built on that site, he had no idea how much traffic is on Story Mill Road. He recognized that no one wants a landfill in his or her back yard. He encouraged the Commissioners to not rush into a decision, but to go into more depth and consider a site that has the least amount of impact yet is appropriate for serving the whole valley. Mr. Jim Chandler, 3110 Augusta Drive, noted that any site for a transfer station must be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. He noted that Department has indicated itwill not support the opening of another cell for the landfill because of environmental implications and questioned whether it would be willing to approve a transfer station on the site. Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell responded to some of the questions and issues raised. She estimated the percentage of garbage recycled at the landfill at between 13 and 15 percent, noting that is in addition to the Headwaters Recycling binnies located throughout the community. She indicated there are currently 220 round trips to the landfill per day and, at current tonnages, she projected an additional 12 round trips for the haul trucks. She noted that when the sites were ranked, the task force used a 1,000 population estimate for the Story Mill Road site. She then stated that the City does own the Love Lane site. The reason its cost was included is that it was purchased with General Fund monies, while the Solid Waste Fund already owns the existing landfill site. She indicated that the cost estimates for improvements to Story Mill Road should be adequate to cover the costs of reconfiguring its intersection with Mcllhattan Road. She then stated that the old landfill site on North Rouse Avenue was considered but, since it is difficult to construct a building on land that has already been landfilled, it was determined not to be a good site. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, the Director stated that staff has not yet prepared cost estimates for moving the composting and recycling operations from the landfill. She noted that if the Griffin Drive site is chosen, it is not large enough to house those operations, although the Love Lane site would be large enough to accommodate them. Director of Public Service Arkell returned to responding to questions, noting that the cost estimates for the Love Lane site were based on the assumption that Love Lane would need to be reconstructed. She indicated that site is located within the entryway overlay corridor and, as a result, would be subject to the City's design objectives plan. She stressed that, while the City can control its vehicles, it cannot control how private vehicles access the transfer station site. She then turned her attention to the Griffin Drive site, noting that potential residential development was not considered when it was rated. She assured the Commission that all wash water from the transfer station would go into the City's sewer system and not onto the land or into the lake. Also, run-off from the parking lot and the building would be treated in retention basins. She recognized that the Griffin Road site is fairly small, but the consultant has indicated there would be adequate room for stacking on site. Project Engineer Karen Finke responded to some of the remaining questions, noting that the City is participating in the task force that has been created to prepare a business plan, resolutions, goals, objectives and procedures for a solid waste district. She noted that the City has indicated an interest in joining a county- wide district when it believes that district will fairly and effectively meet the community's business and resident needs. She then stated that when she met with representatives from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality in late 2000 or early 2001, she spoke to several people who indicated they were glad to see the City pursuing a transfer station because they were not supportive of opening another cell at the landfill. Mr. Erik Colville indicated that self haul costs were included in the estimates because they are real costs. He noted that no one will dispute the impacts that a transfer station will have on property values; however, the information available is inconclusive and, as a result, he was unable to quantify those impacts. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, Mr. Colville stated the perception is that there is no difference between a landfill and a transfer station. He indicated that a transfer station is much less intensive and blends into the background more than a landfill does. He indicated that the Department of Environmental Quality must approve a transfer station, and they do so following a rigorous process. He noted that he works in eleven western states; and Montana's process is very close to that followed for siting of a landfill, which results in ensuring that it will not negatively impact the environment. 10-28-2002 -14- Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Mr. Colville stated that a site on North 19th Avenue was evaluated and scored high on the ranking system, but the costs were prohibitive. Also, given the infrastructure and population distribution, that would be a good area for a transfer station. He cautioned that, as possible sites to the west are considered, a transfer station becomes less economical and less reasonable. As a result, he stressed the importance of selecting a site within five miles of the Montana State University campus, which is the centroid of Bozeman's population. He acknowledged that, through sharing of costs with other entities, a site further from the centroid could become viable; however, he reminded the Commission that the initial development costs are only a small part of the overall costs. He indicated that, within a solid waste district, it is more feasible to have transfer stations for the various population centers. Further responding to Commissioner Youngman, Mr. Colville stated the cost projections are based on current dollars. He stated that this method of calculation allows for comparison of the various sites and does not result in any significant differences from using future projected costs that are discounted back to the present. In response to additional questions from Commissioner Youngman, Mr. Colville stated that a series of transfer stations were built in 1964 in Bellevue and, at that time, no one anticipated those stations would still be in operation today. He noted that the station that incurs blowing trash is now processing roughlyfour times the amount of trash for which it was designed, and its technology is old. Commissioner Brown stated one of his main concerns is the zero cost for the landfill site and the lack of information on the benefits that could result from sale of that property if another site is selected. He is also struggling with the self haul costs being included since they are not costs to the City per sb. He recognized that if the costs of a transfer station become too high, private haulers have the alternative of hauling directly to the Logan landfill. Mayor Kirchhoff concluded this agenda item, indicating that written comments will be accepted in the Clerk of the Commission's office until 5:00 p.m. on Friday, November 1. Adjournment- 10:15 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. STEVEN R. KIR~NHOFF, Mayor ~'/ ATTEST: ROBIN L. SULLIVAN Clerk of the Commission 10-28-2002