Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-11-21 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA November 21, 2005 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, on Monday, November 21,2005, at 7:00 p.m. Present were Commissioner Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Marcia Youngman, Commissioner Steve Kirchhoff (arrived at 6:50 p.m.), Commissioner Lee Hietala, City Manager Chris Kukulski, Assistant City Manager Ron Brey, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell, Director of Finance Anna Rosenberry, Director of Public Safety-Fire Chuck Winn, Planning Director Andy Epple, City Attorney Paul Luwe, and City Clerk Robin Sullivan. Mayor Andrew Cetraro was absent. Sianina of Notice of Special Meeting Each of the Commissioners, in turn, signed the Notice of Special Meeting. Work Session - Continued review of proposed UDO revisions Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders continued review of the proposed revisions to the unified development ordinance, beginning with No. 40. He noted the current language provides that, if the City gets more applications than it can process in a timely manner, those projects providing the most affordable housing units will be prioritized first, based on the definition of affordable housing, with all other projects being prioritized in descending order based on the affordability of the units. This proposal would suggest the current language is discriminatory against market rate projects. The Assistant Planning Director stated the Planning Board and Zoning Commission have forwarded a split recommendation on this proposal Mr. Dab Dabney, Farmhouse Partners, encouraged the Commission to retain the priority review for affordable housing. He noted that in the last nine years, he has built $40 million in affordable housing units in the area, through the low income housing tax credit program. He cautioned that the cycle for taking advantage of this program is very tight, and it would not be possible to do so if the priority review process were not in place. He cited his most recent project, noting that he received word in April that his application was successful and that he had until the third week of October to have the project underway and expend at least 10 percent of the expected budget. Since, due to the costs of having plans prepared, he does not start that process until after getting tax credit approval; and it took until October to get through the City's process and receive approval, barely in time to expend the $600,000 required to retain the tax credits. He concluded by stating that, without the current code provisions, he would have lost those credits and the project would no longer have been feasible. The Commissioners agreed this revision should not be forwarded. Assistant Planning Director Saunders returned to No. 19, noting that both the proposal and staff's comments are fairly lengthy. He noted that, while the initial proposal references infill projects, this edit is far more extensive and would allow a variety of light manufacturing and commercial uses in the BP, R-O, and R-4 zoning districts. He then forwarded staff's position that these uses do not seem to be a good fit with the character of those zoning districts. Following discussion, the Commissioners agreed not to forward this revision. The Assistant Planning Director stated that No. 34 proposes to modify the Northeast HMU district, and would allow a height limitation of 120 feet. He noted that the various advisory boards and staff have recommended that this not be moved forward; the Commissioners concurred. Assistant Planning Director Saunders introduced No. 35, to revise the requirements for establishing an historic mixed use district. He noted that staff and the advisory boards have reviewed this proposed revision and recommended it not be approved; the Commissioners concurred. 11-21-05 - 2 - The Assistant Planning Director stated that No. 36 has been broken into two separate edits, Nos. 36 and 36a. No. 36 addresses review standards and suggests that contemporary design in the overlay district is not sufficiently defined. He noted that staff feels the term is adequately defined in the dictionary and that the design guidelines for the conservation overlay district provide adequate guidance. He indicated that No. 36a requires either Design Review Board or Administrative Design Review on all projects within the conservation overlay district, which is more strict than current regulations. He concluded by forwarding the recommendation that the Commission take no action; the Commissioners concurred that these revisions not be forwarded. The Assistant Planning Director stated that No. 37a is the same as No. 36a; the Commissioners concurred that it not be forwarded. The Assistant Planning Director turned his attention to No. 38, noting it codifies the Commission's policy that a casino with on-premise sale of alcohol not be allowed to sell automotive fuel. He indicated that this revision would eliminate that restriction until a complete hearing has been held on it. He stated that the advisory boards were split on this revision. Commissioner discussion revealed a split in the Commissioners present. Commissioner Youngman requested that this item be continued to next week's meeting, when a full Commission is present; the Commissioners agreed. The Assistant Planning Director stated that No. 39 clarifies existing requirements; and the Planning Board and Zoning Commission supported. The Commissioners agreed that this revision should be forwarded through the process. Assistant Planning Director Saunders indicated that No. 42 would change the review process to limit when public comment may be provided during review of a site plan subject to Planning Director action. He forwarded staff's recommendation that this not be considered; the Commissioners concurred. The Assistant Director noted that No. 44 is from Planning staff and is designed to provide clarity and a standard on the calculating and providing of privately owned land for yard and recreational activities, particularly for multi-family units. He indicated this amendment pertains to developments with five dwelling units or more, whether they are single- or multi-household units. Commissioner Kirchhoff arrived at 6:50 p.m. The Commissioners agreed to forward the entire proposed revision through the review process. The Assistant Planning Director stated that No. 45 allows stormwater basins to be constructed within open spaces. He then noted the Engineering Division has undertaken a stormwater master planning process, and part of that is the development of a best practices manual. Following a brief discussion, the Commissioners chose not to forward this revision. The Assistant Planning Director indicated that No. 47 adds language on how information for master site plans is to be provided, noting it provides the option for written or graphic information. The Commissioners agreed to forward this revision. The Assistant Planning Director concluded this review session with No. 55, which proposes the combining of provisions from two separate processes. He indicated that both staff and the advisory boards do not support the change; the Commissioners agreed to not forward it through the process. 11-21-05 Break - 6:55 to 7:05 p.m. Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss declared a break from 6:55 p.m. to 7:05 p.m., to prepare for the regular meeting. - 3 - Pledae of Alleaiance and Moment of Silence The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. Authorize absence of Mavor Cetraro from this meetina It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Mayor Cetraro's absence be authorized. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Minutes -June 6. Julv 5, Julv 11. Julv 18. Auaust 1. Auaust 15. September 6. September 12, October 3. November 7 and November 14. 2005 It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the minutes of the meeting of June 6, 2005, be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss deferred action on the minutes of the meetings of July 5, July 11, July 18, August 1, August 15, September 6, September 12, October 3, November 7, and November 14, 2005, to a later date. Consent Items City Manager Kukulski presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Ordinance No. 1654 - amendina Sections 2.04.020 and 2.04.040. revisina time set for seatina of new Commission: finallv adopt ORDINANCE NO. 1654 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING THAT SECTIONS 2.04.020 AND 2.04.040 OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE AMENDED; PROVIDING FOR THE TIME OF ASSUMPTION OF DUTIES OF NEWLY ELECTED COMMISSIONERS AND AMENDING THE TIME FOR MEETING. Ordinance No, 1656 - adoptina Chapter 9.72. pertainina to special securitv service charaes for loud or unrulv aatherinas: provisionallv adopt and bring back in two weeks for final adoption ORDINANCE NO. 1656 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA PROVIDING THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE AMENDED BY ADDING CHAPTER 9.72 PERTAINING TO SPECIAL SECURITY SERVICE CHARGES AT LOUD OR UNRULY GATHERINGS. Commission Resolution No. 3875 - intent to annex 4.55:t acres Ivina alona the west side of Thomas Lane. north of Baxter Lane: set public hearina for December 19.2005 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3875 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 TRACTS OF LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN, AND HEREIN MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED, TO 11-21-05 -4- EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID CONTIGUOUS TRACTS WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS THEREOF. Commission Resolution No. 3876 - intent to annex 313.95 acres located on the east side of StOry Mill Road approximately 2.000 feet north of the intersection of Mcllhattan Road and directly east of the Citv of Bozeman Landfill: set public hearina for December 19. 2005 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3876 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. Approval of reauest for extension of period of approval for annexation of Tract 1. COS No. 1895. located at the southeast corner ofthe intersection of StOry Mill Road and Bridaer Drive. to Februarv 21, 2006. to allow Blue Skv Development (new property owners) an opportunitv to compete the remaining terms of annexation Authorize Citv Manaaer to sian - Revised and Restated Interlocal Aareement Governina the Montana Municipal Insurance Authority Authorize City Manager to sian - Acceptance of Public Access Easements from Schroeder Homes. Incoo and Chad M. Moe. Greaorv S. Klevenbera and Robert W. Harms - 28-foot-wide easements across Lot 2. Block 12. Cattail Creek Subdivision. Phase liB. and Lot 3. Block 12, Cattail Creek Subdivision. Phase liB Authorize City Manaaer to sian - Acceptance of Public Pedestrian Access Easement from Mark R. Albrecht - 30-foot-wide easement across Lot 2. Block 5. Walker Propertv Subdivision (alona north side of US Hiahwav 10/Frontaae Road) Ratify Citv Manaaer's approval to allow sinale-familv residence at 1604 Maple Drive to connect to City sewer service without annexina, subiect to conditions in memo dated November 21 Authorize Mavor Pro Tempore to sian - letter to Montana Department of Environmental Qualitv arantina signatory authority for MPDES Permit MT -0022608 to Wastewater Treatment Plant Superintendent Approval of Depositorv Bonds and Pledaed Securities as of September 30. 2005. as reviewed bv Commissioner Kirchhoff and Commissioner Hietala Building Inspection Division report for October 2005 Claims 11-21-05 Ms. Jenny Haubenreiser, member of the Community Alcohol Coalition, spoke in favor of Ordinance No. 1656, noting that this type of ordinance is becoming more common in campus communities. She noted that the Coalition identified this as a desired ordinance a couple of years ago, and she is pleased to see it is now being considered by the Commission. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, 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 Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. - 5 - Public comment No comment was received under this agenda item. Zone Map Amendment - establish initial municipal zonina of "R-4". Residential-Hiah-densitv. on 42.18 acres located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Davis Lane and Catamount Street - Morrison-Maierle, Inc.. for Lake. LLC (Z-05219) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Zone Map Amendment requested by Morrison-Maierle, Inc., for Lake, LLC, under Application No. Z-05219, to establish an initial municipal zoning designation of "R-4", Residential-High-density, on 42.18 acres described as Lot 3, Minor Subdivision No. 221. The subject property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Davis Lane and Catamount Street, in Cattail Creek Subdivision, Phase III. Public hearing Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Jody Sanford presented the staff report. She noted that in 2004, this property was approved for annexation and an "R-3" , Residential-Medium-density, zoning designation. The annexation has not yet been completed, so the property is currently zoned "AS", Agricultural Suburban, in the county. She reviewed the surrounding zoning designations, which include a variety of low to medium residential zoning designations, public lands and institutions, and agricultural suburban. The Associate Planner stated that staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria, and staffs comprehensive findings are contained in the written staff report. Based on those findings, staff has recommended approval ofthe proposed zoning. However, following the public hearing at its November 1 meeting, the Zoning Commission recommended that the blanket "R-4" zoning not be approved, but that a proposal for "R-4" zoning in smaller locations coinciding with the master plan for the parcel be considered. Associate Planner Sanford noted that, included in the Commissioners' packets, is a draft preliminary plan showing the different land uses anticipated within this development. She stated that this preliminary plan responds to the comments received during the informal review and provides a mix of uses rather than the large multi-household units initially proposed. She then indicated that the master plan for development will limit the locations where high-density development may occur, even if the entire parcel is zoned "R-4". Responding to Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss, the Associate Planner stated that the annexation agreement has not yet been returned for Commission action; however, she anticipates that it will be returned in conjunction with the zone map after the decision on this application has been made. Mr. Ken Smith, architect representing the owner, stated that, as a result of the feedback received during informal review of the conceptual plan, the plan has been significantly revised. He highlighted some of the changes, including the provision for streets around the lake and a dedicated corridor along Cattail Creek and a more grid-like system of roads throughout the development. He noted that the streets now create a more urban scale block pattern, with different residential uses and densities being proposed within the subdivision. He indicated that this plan now includes a mix of residential development ranging from low- density single-family detached to high-density multi-family units. The various uses are separated by roads, and separated pedestrian facilities are to be extended through the development. Mr. Smith noted that under this new master plan, 45 percent of the property is to be in parkland and open space and 16 percent in public roads, leaving 39 percent for development. He estimated that 300 to 350 dwelling units are to be constructed, for a gross density of eight units per acre. He concluded by noting there will be opportunities for home ownership within this development; and those owners will have the opportunity to participation in the owners association and to enjoy the amenities on the site. Mr. Ken smith addressed the Zoning Commission's suggestion that the "R-4" zoning be approved only for those areas where high-density residential development is to occur. He cautioned that, since the project continues to undergo change and the exact locations of the streets and lot lines are not yet known, it would be extremely difficult to determine the zoning lines; and he does not wish to incur a situation where lots are split by zoning lines. 11-21-05 - 6 - No one was present to speak in opposition to the requested zone map amendment. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss closed the public hearing. Decision It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Zone Map Amendment requested by Morrison-Maierle, Inc., for Lake, LLC, under Application No. Z-05219, to establish an initial municipal zoning designation of "R-4", Residential-High-density, on 42.18 acres described as Lot 3, Minor Subdivision No. 221, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit, within thirty days of approval by the City Commission, a 24-inch by 36-inch mylar zone map titled "Crestview Zone Map Amendment", an 8Y:z- inch by 11-inch or 8Y:z-inch by 14-inch paper map, and a digital copy to the Planning Department containing the metes and bounds legal description, total acreage, and adjoining rights-of-way and/or street access easements, acceptable to the Director of Public Service. 2. The ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides a metes and bounds legal description and a map of the area to be rezoned, which will be utilized in the preparation of the ordinance to Officially amend the City of Bozeman zoning map. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Zone MapAmendment~ establish initial municipal zoning of "R-4". Residential-High-density. on-5 acres Ivina alon9 Thomas Drive. north of Baxter Lane - C&H Enaineerina for William H. Louis. Brenda Burden. James D. Secor. and Bruce W. Campbell (Z-05146) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Zone Map Amendment requested by William H. Louis, Brenda Burden, James D. Secor, and Bruce W. Campbell under Application No. Z-05146, to establish an initial municipal zoning designation of "R-4", Residential-High-density, on :1:4.55 acres described as Lots 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7, Baxter Lane Subdivision No.1. The subject properties are located along the west side of Thomas Lane, north of its intersection with Baxter Lane. Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Senior Planner Dave Skelton requesting that this public hearing be continued to December 19, at which time the hearing on annexation of this subject property is to be conducted. Public hearing Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss opened the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the hearing be continued to December 19 per staff's request. The motion carried by the follOWing Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Intent to expand business improvement district to the west. north. and east of existing district This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the intent to expand the business improvement district to the west, north, and east of the existing district as established by Commission Resolution No. 3870, entitled: 11-21-05 - 7 - COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3870 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, STATING THE COMMISSION'S INTENT TO EXPAND THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IN THE CITY'S DOWNTOWN AREA. Public hearing Included in the Commissioners' packets was a letter from Just Plain Local, LLC, owner of 502 East Main Street, stating opposition to the proposed expansion. Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss opened the public hearing. Mr. Paul Reichert, Executive Director of the Downtown Bozeman Partnership, presented the staff report. He reminded the Commissioners that 71 percent of the properties within the district are represented on the petition requesting that the district be expanded and noted that expanding the size of the district will generate additional revenues. He noted that the business improvement district will exist until 201 0, at which time the district will either sunset or be extended. He highlighted the main goals and programs for the next five years, which include facilitating additional redevelopment downtown, attracting new businesses, continuing special events, keeping the downtown clean and safe, continuing to manage and expand control of public parking, and continuing to improve property values in the downtown through maintenance of pUblic infrastructure. No public comment was made in opposition to the proposed expansion. Since there were no objections, Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss closed the public hearing. Decision It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Commission direct staff to bring back a resolution providing for expansion of the boundaries of the business improvement district. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Intent to create Special Improvement District No. 684 - improvements to Durston Road between and at its intersections with North 19th Avenue and Fowler Avenue extended This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the intent to create Special Improvement District No. 684, as established by Commission Resolution No. 3864, entitled: COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3864 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, RELATING TO SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 684; DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO CREATE THE EXTENDED DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF UNDERTAKING CERTAIN LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THE COSTS THEREOF AND INCIDENTAL THERETO THROUGH THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BONDS SECURED BY THE CITY'S SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT REVOLVING FUND AND ESTABLISHING COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE. 11-21-05 Public hearing Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss opened the public hearing. City Engineer Rick Hixson gave a brief overview of the process to date, noting that the resolution of intent to create this district set the public hearing for this date. He then noted that the public protest -8- period closed on November 15 and, prior to that deadline, five written protests representing 3 percent of the properties within the district were received. At Commissioner Youngman's request, the City Engineer, Project Engineer Sue Stodola, and the consulting engineers responded to a number of questions that had been submitted to staff earlier in the day. Project Engineer Sue Stodola stated the bond amount for the Durston Road project is 56 percent greater than the bond amount for the West Babcock Street and, when the cost per square foot is calculated, the assessment rate is approximately 92 percent more. She noted the most significant contributing factors include the fact that the Durston Road improvements are 5 feet wider and 300 feet longer because it is a minor arterial; intersection improvements are included; and costs for some of the construction materials are estimated at 30 to 40 percent higher than last year. The engineer's estimate has taken all of those anticipated increases into account, thus leading to the $7 million figure. She then stressed that this resolution sets the maximum amount for bonding for the project; and if the construction bid comes in lower than the estimate, the bond amount will be reduced accordingly. Mr. Greg Stratton, consulting engineer, stated the median near North 19th Avenue is to be 4 feet wide and 230 feet long, and its costs are negligible. City Engineer Hixson stressed that the raised median enhances safety by preventing certain movements. He then indicated that to increase the size of the district would result in delaying construction. He noted that the number of county properties west of the existing boundary line increases and, if the district were to be extended westward, they would be omitted from the assessment and the result would be an assessment rate at or greater than the one listed in this resolution. He then indicated that staff is recommending the maximum amount of impact fees be used for this project; and staff has recently identified an additional $58,000 in improvements at the intersection of North 19th Avenue and Durston Road that qualifies for that source of funding. City Engineer Rick Hixson noted a question has arisen about why 1995 transportation general obligation bond monies are not being contributed to this project. He reminded the Commissioners that in 1995, the voters approved the bond issue, which was based on a list of seventeen specific projects. The one outstanding project on that list is the improvements to Durston Road between North 7th Avenue and North 19th Avenue, which will also be undertaken next summer since the City has just completed acquisition of the needed right-of-way. He indicated that $1 Y:z million remains from the bond proceeds; and that is the amount that was earmarked for this project. A conversation with bond counsel has revealed that, if there are monies left over from the bond proceeds and the Commission so wishes, it could earmark those remaining monies for the improvements west of North 19th Avenue. He stressed, however, that the small amount he anticipates would be remaining would have little effect on the assessment rate. The City Engineer noted this project has been subjected to a significant amount of public interaction, including two informational meetings on the design, two informational meetings on the creation of the special improvement district, and the required public hearings. Consulting engineer Ph ill Forbes reviewed the four methods of assessment for special improvement districts, which are front footage, square footage, assessed valuation, or a combination thereof. He stressed that each of these options was carefully considered and, as a result of that evaluation, it was determined the square foot method was the fairest. He noted that a combination of methods may also be used, but stressed that combination must be applied to all properties within the district, and the outcome would be only slightly different. City Engineer Hixson noted that county properties are not being assessed under this district because the County Commission chose not to adopt the resolution allowing it to be a joint district. Those county parcels will be subject to a payback proviSion that will be considered later in the process. The City Engineer indicated that there are already sidewalks along much of Durston Road, although some of those sidewalks will need to be replaced. He also noted that many of the sidewalks are along the backs of lots and, as a result, the City is responsible for those sidewalks. Director of Finance Anna Rosenberry addressed the issues of the resolving fund and the administrative fee. She noted that state statute requires that 5 percent of the bonds be deposited into the SID revolving fund and allows for levying of an addition 5 percent if determined necessary. In addition, the 11-21-05 -9- City includes a 3-percent administrative fee to help offset the costs of creating and administering the special improvement district over its nineteen-year life. She then indicated that the City is not recommending the discretionary 5-percent revolving fund assessment be included. Responding to Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss, Director of Finance Rosenberry noted that the monies from the payback district could be either used to reduce the outstanding bonds or could be credited back to the Street Impact Fee to help fund future projects. She then stressed that this is an issue to be addressed later in the process. Mr. Less Scheidt, 706 North Hunters Way, stated he is retired and on a fixed income, and all taxes are going up. He stated the area method is inconsistent with the amount of traffic on the street and, once the improvements are completed, there will be even more traffic. He suggested that the County add the 2- percent tax that it can, and that those monies be used to help write down the costs of these improvements. He encouraged the Commission to delay the improvements to this road, noting that the result could be a more equitable funding of the costs. Ms. Martie Stewart, 3303 Bitterroot Way, stated she will be directly affected by the West Babcock Street payback district, and voiced concern that the public was not given a chance to react what that district was implemented. She also expressed concern about the inability to interact with staff during the public information meetings and to get questions answered. She then read a letter from Lorna Nelson, 503 North 20th Avenue, protesting the special improvement district. Ms. Robin Thomas, 322 North 22nd Avenue, stated she's lived on this street for sixteen years and remembers when Durston Road was a rural dirt road on which one could enjoy riding bicycle or walking the dog and North 19th Avenue did not exist. She has already seen a huge increase in traffic on Durston Road and recognized that, if it is improved, even more traffic will use it. She feels that the residents along this portion of Durston Road are being asked to contribute to road improvements for the convenience of those traveling west even though they don't personally use that roadway very often. She concluded by stating she does not feel it is fair for the residents on North 22nd Avenue to be asked to pay while those on North 16th Avenue are not being asked to do so. Mr. Chuck Hinesley, 3663 Durston Road, spoke in support ofthe special improvement district, noting that he has been working on improvements to Durston Road since 1994. He noted that, as he drives on West Babcock Street, he is extremely proud of the former and current City Commissioners and the city staff, and he looks forward to similar improvements being made to Durston Road. He believes these improvements are in the best interests of Bozeman, not only for the drivers but for the children who need sidewalks and bike lanes to ensure their safety. He concluded by stating he feels this resolution provides a fair method of allocating costs and encouraged moving forward with the creation of the district. Mr. Bruce Grubbs, 322 North 22nd Avenue, acknowledged that Durston Road needs to be improved; his issue is with the way the costs are being assessed. He noted that the need for improvements is the result of growth and suggested that impact fees and other funding mechanisms be used to fund the costs. He suggested another option would be to pursue another general obligation bond for street improvements or a street improvement assessment that could be used to repay bonds or build up funds for major street improvements. Mr. Mike Christie, 3104 West Babcock Street, stated he understands the reason the square foot assessment method is used. What disheartens him, however, is that the NorthWest Neighborhood Network attended a meeting with legislators, the County, and the City and begged for other methods of assessment that were not even considered during the last legislative session. He then expressed concern that the bid specifications for the gravel to be used in the road construction exclude every contractor in the valley except for JTL Group, which precludes competitive bidding and results in higher costs. Ms. Pam Marcella, 3045 Lily Drive, stated she has lived in the valley for eleven years and has done everything possible to move into a nicer neighborhood, only to be asked to pay $3,000 more for the street improvements. She noted that 11,000 cars use Durston Road every day, yet only a handful of residents are being asked to pay the costs of the improvements. She noted that, while she might not use the library, she's asked to pay for that; and while her children attend private school, she pays for public schools. She concluded by stating she feels the method of funding the improvements needs to be reconsidered, particularly since more building is occurring along this roadway. 11-21-05 - 10 - Ms. Rebecca Adams, 2503 Rose Street, stated she is opposed to the special improvement district. She stated that residents have voiced their dismay during the informational meetings that have been held, but she feels they have not been heard. She aCknowledged that, when she purchased her home, she was required to sign a waiver. She does not, however, feel it is fair to ask a small area to pay for major improvements that many people use. She then stated she would like to see monies from the payback district applied to lowering the SID costs rather than to the impact fee account. She concluded by cautioning that recent rate increases and bond issues make it nearly impossible to live in Bozeman and asked the Commission to not further compound those financial impacts. Mrs. Shelly Engler, 2436 Snapdragon Street, noted she has written a letter of protest. She then asked that the failure to obtain competitive bids and the inequity of funding be addressed, noting that the residents in this area have already paid impact fees and are not being asked to pay again. She concluded by voicing her concurrence with the previous comments. Mr. Gil Stober, 395 Valley Drive, stated he resides within the payback district. He agreed with the comments of previous speakers in opposition to the special improvement district. He then questioned how the boundaries of the district were established and why properties along Durston Road between North 7th Avenue and North 19th Avenue are not being included in a special improvement district to help fund the costs of those road improvements. He concluded by asking if the City has applied for any state or federal monies to assist with the costs of the improvements. Ms. Vranna Sue Hinck, 2605 West Villard Street, stated she resides in a single-family home on an 0.7 -acre parcel within the payback district. Across the street is a parcel approximately twice the size of her lot, with fifteen units on it. She expressed concern that those fifteen units will be required to pay a total of twice what her single-family residence will be required to pay under the current structure. She then expressed her willingness to pay taxes for more services, but she's not happy about the prospect of paying more than her neighbors for the same services. She concluded by noting that the Commissioners have previously received a letter outlining her concerns. Mr. Harry Kirschenbaum, 141 Chouteau Avenue, noted the improvements to West Babcock Street and Durston Road improve the neighborhood and enhance property values. He expressed concern that this special improvement district includes approximately $15,000 in assessments to the school district and $105,000 for city parks and asked if those costs will be backcharged to the residents. He then read a letter into the record from Richard and Janet Fulcher, 407 North 20th Avenue, expressing concern that the costs of living in Bozeman are becoming prohibitive and that they cannot afford additional assessments for the improvements to Durston Road. Mr. John Rosa stated he owns property along Durston Road and recognizes that the street is unsafe and needs to be improved. He stressed that Bozeman is growing, whether residents like it or not, and the northwest quadrant is the best place to grow at this time. He voiced support for the creation of the special improvement district to get the improvements completed, stating he feels it is better to make those improvements sooner rather than later. Mr. Charlie Rose, 813 Aster Avenue, acknowledged that Durston Road is in deplorable condition and needs to be improved; however, he questioned the proposed funding for those improvements. He asked why the improvements to the intersection of North 19th Avenue and Durston Road have been included in this project. He also noted that during the informational meeting, staff admitted the cost estimates were based on gasoline being $4 to $5 a gallon and escalating concrete costs. He voiced concern that there will be a single bid for the project, right at the estimated cost. He further questioned why the residents between North 19th Avenue and North 7th Avenue are not being asked to participate in the costs of that portion of the project. He also asked if there is a mechanism for citizen oversight on this project, stating he feels the residents are being asked to pay too much for these improvements. He concluded by asking for such oversight and the requirement for a minimum of three bids for this project. Ms. Jennifer Allain, 801 Aster Avenue, stated growth should pay its own way. She noted that they paid a street impact fee when they purchased their home in Harvest Creek Subdivision but are now being asked to pay again for street improvements. She concluded by stating she feels this is unfair and indicating support for the prior speakers' comments opposing this special improvement district. Mr. Von Helmuth, 2903 Lily Drive, questioned why the City has allowed developers to sign a waiver of right to protest the creation of a special improvement district rather than requiring them to install the 11-21-05 - 11 - improvements. He noted that the developer of Harvest Creek Subdivision sought and received an extension on the requirement to make the improvements based on his claim that he would not be able to provide affordable housing of he was required to make the road improvements first. He characterized this as an issue of fairness, and suggested that the district be expanded to include properties to the west. He concluded by asking how the 3-percent administrative fee is to be used and by asking whether a phased project has been considered. Mr. Greg Allen, 502 Greenway, stated he is working on a project that is affected by this special improvement district. He spoke in support of the special improvement district, recognizing that 70 percent of the costs are funded through impact fees. He concluded by stating that, while the square foot method of assessment may not be perfect, it is the best option available. Mr. Ted Newman, 535 Valley Drive, questioned why the Durston Road project is being done in two pieces and why those residents between North 7th Avenue and North 19th Avenue are not being asked to pay. He suggested that the entire project be bid as a single unit, thus allowing the general obligation bond monies to be used for the entire project. Ms. Mary Vant Hull, 416 East Story Street, stressed the importance of proViding sidewalks and safety for the children living in the area. She also noted that riding bicycles to work, to school, and for recreation is becoming more difficult along this road, and traffic will only get worse as more development occurs. She also identified the Fowler Road intersection as important, noting she would like to see a trail that links the ponds to the regional park and eventually to Belgrade. She suggested this may be the time to consider sidewalks and trails that are separated from streets rather than reducing this to a community where everyone travels by car. Mr. Richard Showalter, 2400 Durston Road, noting that he had submitted written testimony. He voiced concern that, since the County chose not to participate in the special improvement district, city residents are being assessed 25 percent more to cover the costs. He suggested that the monies from the payback district go toward reducing the costs to those within the district. Mr. Don White, attorney representing Roger and Rosalind Smith, stated they have no objection to the improvements; however, they have requested that the method of assessment be carefully examined. He showed a diagram of the area, identifying those properties excluded from the district since they lie within the county, those with commercial development and multi-family dwellings, and those with single-family homes. In light of the significantly higher impacts that commercial and multi-family development create on the roads, he suggested the assessed valuation method would result in a more equitable assessment. Ms. Vonda Laird, 414 North 20th Avenue, noted that when they moved into their home 25 years ago, there were only three streets west of them. She acknowledged that Durston Road needs to be improved; however, with these improvements, residents on North 20th Avenue will lose access to Durston Road and she finds it difficult to pay for those improvements with that loss of access. She concluded by asking that the residents along North 20th Avenue be removed from this district since they will not benefit from the improvements. Ms. Carolyn Powell, 315 Valley Drive, stated she resides on a half-care lot in the payback district. She voiced concern that, if their property is annexed, they will not to pay not only the costs of annexation, but the costs of the payback to this special improvement district as well; and they cannot afford that. She also drew attention to all of the development that is occurring west of Fowler Avenue and suggested that those areas also be asked to participate in the costs of the improvements since they are also generating traffic on Durston Road. Ms. Deb Stober, 395 Valley Drive, requested that residents be allowed to pay their assessments before the bonds are sold so they can avoid interest costs. She also noted that the 13.6-acre parcel behind her property is in the process of annexing and asked that they be included within the district. She further asked that the amount anticipated from the payback district be initially funded with impact fees to minimize impacts on those within the district. She proposed that the City require three bids for the construction, to ensure that a competitive bid is received. Ms. Stober expressed concern that, while work has been done on this project for ten years, new information is being submitted at this meeting. She questioned whether every possible option for funding has now been considered. She also questioned why a 3-percent administrative fee is assessed and 11-21-05 - 12 - suggested that it be eliminated. She concluded by voicing concern that, under the square-foot assessment method, the 56 county residents will be asked to fund 25 percent of the costs under the payback district and asked that an alternative way be found to allow the county residents to participate. Director of Public Service Arkell responded to may of the questions and issues raised during the public hearing. She noted that the City receives $550,000 a year from gas tax, and those monies are specifically earmarked for various projects throughout the city; this year's funding has been earmarked for North Wallace Avenue. She stated the City already has a street maintenance district assessment and acknowledged that an additional assessment could be levied under that district that is earmarked for arterial improvements. The Director of Public Service noted that, several years ago, the Commission made the conscious decision to require waivers of right to protest the creation of a special improvement district to improve Durston Road rather than having piecemeal improvements to the roadway with each development. That philosophy has changed for those developments lying west of Fowler Avenue, and those developers are now being required to construct their portions of the improvements in conjunction with their subdivisions. Director of Public Service Arkell stated that, since Durston Road is not on the urban route, no application for state or federal monies has been submitted. She acknowledged that the property owners will be paying for the assessments for the school district and city properties unless services within those governmental entities are decreased to cover those costs within current budgets. The Director of Public Service acknowledged that it would be good to receive more than one bid, to ensure that the cost is competitive; however, she cautioned it is not possible to mandate that a specific number of bids be received. She noted that, by combining the two Durston Road projects, staff is hopefUl that the bid amount will be lower. Director of Public Service Arkell recognized that North 20th Avenue will have restricted access onto Durston Road, but it is not prohibited. She then turned her attention to the Lydens property, which is currently the subject of annexation, and acknowledged that some mechanism may be found for ensuring that the approximately $141,000 assessment be contributed back to the costs of the district. City Engineer Rick Hixson stated that the gravel specification in the bid documents does not limit the number of vendors who may bid; rather, any gravel pit can supply it. He indicated that the lack of competitive bids on recent projects is simply a product of the business climate in the valley. The City Engineer then turned his attention to the 3-percent administrative fee, noting that will generate approximately $60,000 to cover the costs of creating and administering the district for nineteen years, including the processing of semi-annual assessments for that period of time. Consulting engineer Greg Stratton responded to some of the comments about the special improvement district for West Babcock Street, noting that residents must be provided the same access they had to the roadway prior to its improvement, and that is the extent to which the driveways were improved. He then stated that the estimated costs for the Durston Road project are based on conversations with several local contractors and the experience with the West Babcock Street project. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, City Engineer Hixson confirmed that there are an estimated11 ,000 vehicle trips per day on Durston Road. Responding to Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss, City Engineer Hixson showed the Commission a map of the various streets in the community that have been developed or improved through a special improvement district. He noted that map reveals almost every street in the main part of the community was funded through a special improvement district. Further responding to Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss, Project Engineer Sue Stodola stated that 71 percent of the street improvement costs are funded through impact fees City Manager Kukulski noted that a little over $4 million in impact fees is being contributed toward these street improvements under the proposed funding, while properties within the district have contributed $946,000 to the street impact fee fund. He then acknowledge that other funding options could be potentially considered. He cautioned, however, that no county has successfully implemented the 2-cent local option 11-21-05 -13- gas tax, which is subject to a county-wide vote. He recognized that the assessment for arterial street improvements is an option that Bozeman has not yet implemented. City Manager Kukulski noted that the payback district is not being considered at this meeting. He stated that if it is patterned after the West Babcock Street payback district, the "latecomer" monies will go into the street impact fee fund. He noted that, if the Commission wishes to have those monies contributed through a different mechanism, it provide direction to staff and then consider the options provided at the appropriate time. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, the City Manager confirmed that the County did not pursue addition to the assessment options for special improvement districts to allow the per-lot method that was previously discussed under the West Babcock Street project. Responding to Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss, Director of Finance Anna Rosenberry stated that a window of a few weeks can be made available between creation of the district and the sale of bonds for those who wish to prepay their assessments and avoid interest costs. Since there were no objections. Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss closed the pUblic hearing. Decision Commissioner Hietala voiced his interest in seeing the general obligation bond monies split between the two Durston Road improvement projects. Commissioner Youngman acknowledged that splitting the general obligation bond monies would be a nice gesture; however, she feels it is important to honor what the City told the voters when they approved the bond issue. She stressed that the projects to be funded through the bond issue were carefully selected and listed in priority order; and to change that at this time would be to not honor the deal made with the voters. She concluded by stating that if there are any monies left over after those projects are completed, she would have no problem with contributing them toward this project. Commissioner Hietala then proposed the creation of a revolving reserve fund for county parcels, which would then be paid back when those parcels become subject to the assessments. He suggested that this financing mechanism could then be used for this project as well as future projects. City Manager Kukulski recognized the benefit of a revolving fund, but noted the trick is identifying the source of the seed money to create that fund. He acknowledged that the City has some assurance that a percentage of the properties in the payback district will contribute while the remainder will not. Commissioner Youngman stated that she would be interested in discussing some way to achieve equity during discussion of the payback district. She is also interested in finding a way to ensure the Lydens property contributes to the special improvement district since it is currently in the annexation process. Commissioner Kirchhoff recognized that efforts are being made to spread the cost as much as possible, and he finds the proposed funding is the best possible. He noted that the roadway improvements are reasonable but not as expensive as they might be if medians were added; and four times the amount of impact fees collected within the district are being contributed to the overall project. He is willing to consider options to make the payback district as good as possible. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, the Commissioners expressed interest in a payback agreement that benefits those within the special improvement district to the greatest extent possible and either inclusion of the Lydens property in the district or the use of those assessments to reduce the costs to other property owners. Commissioner Youngman expressed her concurrence with Commissioner Kirchhotrs comments, noting that the entire community shares in the costs of growth. She then stated that, throughout the process, she finds the City has been responsive to the neighbors to the greatest extent possible Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss stated that he, too, finds the Commission has listened to the neighborhood and has tried to respond with revised roadway plans and a payback district that helps write down the costs of the project. He finds the administrative fee is not enough to materially impact the costs 11-21-05 - 14- of the overall project but helps to cover the costs of administering this district. He is worried about the safety of the roadway and noted that development in this area has been frozen until roadway improvements are completed in light of those concerns. He is concerned that the County is not participating in the costs of improvement, particularly since it is approving development further west that will impact the road further. He concluded by voicing his support for the district as proposed. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission authorize and direct staff to bring back a resolution creating Special Improvement District No. 684, improvements to Durston Road between and at its intersections with North 19th Avenue and Fowler Avenue extended. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. Discussion - FYI Items The fOllowing "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1) Letter from Kathy Campbell, 2205 Bridger Drive, dated November 7, urging the Commission to allow Legends at Bridger Creek, Phase II, to keep the currently proposed street layout rather than realigning Boylan Drive to be adjacent to the open space along Bridger Creek. (2) Letter of resignation from the Beautification Advisory Board, submitted by Micheline Bisaillon, dated October 30. week. (3) Copy of the garbage collection schedule and hours of landfill operation for Thanksgiving (4) Copy of an e-mail between Tony Kolnik and the Leslie C. Taylor, legal counsel for Montana State University, regarding MSU's water supply from the ditch that has been relocated in the Alder Creek Subdivision. (5) Updated listing of planning projects to be considered at upcoming Commission meetings, dated November 15. (6) Agenda for the November 16 meeting of the Solid Waste Management District Board of Directors, along with a graph showing the monthly incoming tonnages for the period July 1, 2004 through October 31 J 2005. (7) Agendas for the County Commission meetings to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 22, and 1 :30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 23, at the Courthouse. (8) Agenda for the County Planning Board meeting to be held at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 22, at the Courthouse. (9) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, November 23, at the Professional Building. (10) Agenda for the Design Review Board meeting to be held at 3:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 23, at the Professional Building. (11) City Manager Kukulski reported that Parks and Recreation Superintendent Dingman and other staff members have been working with the Bridger Ski Foundation on the new trail network along Lindley Park, the cemetery, and hospital property. He noted that they have requested permission to post signs along the new trail system, to identify that its use is limited to nordic skiing; the staff has indicated support for the proposal. (12) The City Manager stated that the Bridger Ski Foundation has also requested permission to groom trails through the East Gallatin Recreation Area, extending into a loop around the City's existing landfill site. He indicated that he has no problem with allowing that use but noted it is important that everyone understand this is a temporary situation. 11-21-05 -15- Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss suggested that approval for the trails be provided through a resolution that specifically states they are only temporary. Assistant City Manager Brey stressed that, as the Bridger Ski Foundation moves forward with its projects, it remains in ongoing discussions with staff and that they have managed to work through a variety of issues to date. (13) The City Manager announced an orientation session with new Commissioners, scheduled from 11 :00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. tomorrow. He noted that this session will be devoted to process, with issues being discussed during the orientation session scheduled for January 3 with the entire Commission. (14) The City Manager stated he had a second conversation with County Commissioner Joe Skinner regarding the planning interlocal agreement; and Commissioner Skinner acknowledges the need for a formal agreement for the donut area. He then suggested that this be a top priority for the upcoming year. (15) City Manager Kukulski stated that the City worked hand in hand with other agencies, including the County and MSU, on the Bobcat/Grizzly football game. He indicated that the agencies are already gearing up for the next game in Bozeman, having identified some changes that need to be considered. (16) Director of Finance Anna Rosenberry stated that Cemetery Board was interested in reviewing the finances of the cemetery and is looking at increasing the rates. She noted that approximately 80 percent of the operations costs are currently covered by the general fund, and stressed that cemeteries across the country are heavily subsidized. She indicated, however, that the rates have not been adjusted since May 2003, and the Cemetery Board is considering a recommendation to increase the rates 3 percent. (17) The City Manager noted that he plans to place on next week's agenda a request for an additional $100,000 commitment to Montana Public Power, Inc., plus provision for an exit penalty. He reminded the Commission that three of the five cities involved have approved the additional funding, and the Butte/Silver Bow Commission is scheduled to act on it at their November 30 meeting. Following discussion, the Commissioners agreed that this item should be placed on next week's agenda. Adiournment - 10:55 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Pro Tempore Krauss; those voting No, none. ATTEST: i21./~~ J ~. SULLIVAN City Clerk 11-21-05