Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05- Replacement and Upgrade of Existing Power Lines and Poles , . BEFORE THE BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF FRANK MUNSHOWER AND JIM PEPPER ON BEHALF OF THE BOZEMAN FINDINGS CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION TO APPEAL AN OF FACT ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRETATION PERTAINING TO THE AND ORDER REPLACEMENT AND UPGRADE OF EXISTING POWER LINES AND POLES BEING CLASSIFIED AS A TYPE I ESSENTIAL SERVICE This matter came before the Bozeman City Commission on September 6,2005, for hearing on the appeal filed by Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association of an administrative interpretation pertaining to the replacement and upgrade of existing power lines and poles being classified as a Type I essential service. The Commission heard the facts bearing on the appeal to determine whether the Plarming Director's interpretation was consistent with the intent and purpose of the Unified Development Ordinance. The applicants presented to the Commission an application describing their appeal ofthe administrative interpretation ofthe use classification, submitted in its original form on August 4,2005, (#C-05004). The Commission held a public hearing on the appeal and considered all relevant evidence relating to the use classification, to determine whether there was an error in the administrative interpretation of the use classification and if the administrative interpretation of the use classification should be upheld or reversed. It appeared to the Commission that all parties wishing to appear and comment were given the opportunity to do so, and therefore, being fully advised of all matters having come before it regarding this application, the Commission makes the following Findings of Fact, as required: FINDINGS OF FACT I. On August 4, 2005, the applicants, Frank Munsbower, 14()7 S. Bozeman, Bozeman, MT 59715, and Jim Pepper, 1322 S. Rouse, Bozeman, MT 59715 on behalf of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association, and represented by Brian Gallik, P.O. Box 6580, Bozeman, MT 59771- 6580, submitted an application for an Appeal of an Administrative Interpretation Pertaining to thc . Replacement and Upgrade of Approximately 3,500 Feet of Existing Power Lines and Poles ("Use") Being Classified as a Type I Essential Service. II. Notice of the time and date of the public hearing was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on August 14 and 21, 2005. Said notice also served to inform interested persons that materials were available for review at the Bozeman Planning & Community Development Department. III. The Bozeman City Commission at its regular meeting on September 6,2005, considered the application at which time the information compiled by City staff was reviewed. The applicants made a formal presentation, including maps and photographs, on the appeal of the administrative interpretation pertaining to the "Use" being classified as a Type 1 Essential Service. The applicant asserted that although this power line does distribute electricity in the area, this powcr linc connects two substations and electricity flows freely on all power lines, and therefore this power line transmitted electricity and should be classified as a Type II Essential Service. The applicants based this interpretation Section 18.02.050 of thc Bozcman Unificd Development Ordinance, "whenever there is an internal conflict within this title, the most restrictive requirements, or that imposing the higher standard, shall govern." The general public in support ofthis appeal had signed a petition submitted by the applicants with the appeal application, and stood to be recognized during the public hearing. Opponents of the appeal, NorthWestern Energy, made a formal presentation in support of the administrative interpretation pertaining to the "Use" being classified as a Type I Essential Service. North Western Energy showed a map of the service area of this "Use", and explained that this electric line distributes electricity to the approximately 5,000 customers in the southeastern area of Bozeman serviced by the Sourdough Substation. NorthWestern Energy described how size and height of poles are prescribed by regulations and physical requirements, not by whether this is a "local scrvice electrical distribution line" or an "electrical transmission line (interstate and intrastate)". Staff presented a letter from Bozeman Deaconess Hospital in support of the administrative interpretation. Thc applicants presented rebuttal to the information provided in supp0l1 ofthc administrative 2 " interpretation. The Commission discussed whether this "Use" was a "local service c1ectrieal distribution line" or an "electrical transmission line (interstate and intrastate)", and ifan error had been made. It was found that current City regulations do not have articulated standards for making clear distinctions between "local service electrical distribution line" and "electrical transmission lines," and further, that the evidence presented on the issue by the applicant and the opponents conflicted, with the result that the proposed "Use" subject to interpretation could not be conclusively established as either Type I or Type II Essential service. IV. The appeal was considered by the Bozeman City Commission and weighed against the review criteria established by Statute. The Commission moved to uphold the appeal on the basis that the most restrictive requirements, or that imposing the higher standard, shall govern the interpretation. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote. As the concurring vote of four members of the Commission is necessary to reverse the interpretation of the Planning Director, the Administrative Interpretation Pertaining to the Replacement and Upgrade of Approximately 3,500 Feet of Existing Power Lines and Poles ("Use") Being Classified as a Type I Essential Service, was upheld. ORDER After considering all matters of record presented at the public hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Replacement and Upgrade of - 3,500 Feet of Existing Power Lines and Poles is classified as a Type I Essential Service. This City Commission order may be appealed by bringing an action in the Eighteenth District Court of Gallatin County, within 30 days after the adoption of these Findings by the City Commission, by following the procedures of Section 76-2-327, M.C.A. DATED this ~ day of 5 tp t c rn be V ,2005. 41t/!i5 Andrew Cetraro, Mayor 3 v kHUOnv ^l~J lmnS~SSV UO~SSp:UlUOJ ::ll{lJO )[Kl[:J _ J l::ldOOJ U1~1 ur,^mnS '1 u~qo'il ~T7~ 1/fl .[T~ :W8:0d 01 SV GtlAOllddV :.LS3LL V .. ..