Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-05 Minutes, City Commission Page 1 MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA June 5, 2006 ***************************** The CommissIOn ofthe City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, on Monday, June 5, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Jeff Krauss, Cr. Sean Becker, Cr. Jeff Rupp, Cr. Steve Kirchhoff, Cr. Kaaren Jacobson, City Manager Chris Kukulski, Assistant City Manager Ron Brey, Finance Director Anna Rosenberry, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell, Director of Public Safety-Fire Chuck Wllln, Planning Director Andy Epple, City Attorney Paul Luwe, and City Clerk Brit Fontenot Pled~e of Alle2iance and Moment of Silence The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. Public Service Announcement Director of Public Works, Debbie Arkell, made a brief presentation titled "Outside Water Conservation: Simple Steps to Saving $ on your Utility Bills." Minutes May 19 and May 22, 2006 Outstanding: January 17, February 21, March 6, and May 15,2006 It was moved by Cr. Becker, seconded by Cr. Rupp, that the minutes of the meetings of May 19, as amended, and May 22, 2006, as submitted, be approved. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Cr. Becker, Rupp, Kirchhoff: Jacobson, and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No belllg none. Mayor Krauss deferred action on the minutes of the meetings of January 17, February 21, March 6, and May 15, 2006, to a later date. Consent Items 06-05-2006 Page 2 City Manager Chris Kukulskt presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. 1. Authorize payment of claims 2. Adopt Resolution 3921 ofIntent to Create Harvest Creek (Phase VI - Xl) Special Improvement Lighting District 3. Authorize City Manager to sign agreement and promise to pay between City of Bozeman and Richard and Kathy Wiersema 4. Authorize City Manager to sign contract for services (parking lot design) with Graelic 5. AuthoriLe for City Manager to sign contract with Marvin and Associates for Traffic Impact Study 6. Acknowledgc receipt of application of anncxation for Mandeville Creek 7. Adopt Resolution 3918 of Intent to Annex Mandeville Creek 8. Authorize City Manager to sign agreement for installation of water service and sanitary sewer stub with Lachenmaier Revocable Trust 9. Authorize City Manager to sign Purchase Agreement and Quit Claim Deed with Darcee Richmond 10. Authorize City Manager to sign Ab'Teement with Music Performance Fund regarding funding for Bozeman Municipal Band 11. Authorize Mayor to sign Findings of Fact and Order for Baxter Meadows Major Subdivision PUD Phase III (P-05065) 12. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Alder Creek Subdivision Phase III; refer to staff 13. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Cattail Creek Subdivision Phases II and III; refer to staff 14. Aeknowledgc receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Flanders Creek Subdivision; refer to staff 15. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Laurel Glen Subdivision Phases I and II; refer to staff 16. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for West Winds Subdivision Phases I and II; refer to staff 17. Aeknow ledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Diamond Estates #2 Subdivision Phase I; refer to staff 18. Aeknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Oak Springs Subdivision Phases I, II, 1Il, and IV; refer to staff 19. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Valley West Subdivision Phases I, II, and III; refer to staff 20. Acknowledge receipt of application for creation of SILDs for Legends at Bridger Creek Subdivision Phases I and II; refer to staff It was moved by Cr. Rupp, seconded by Cr. Kirchhofl that the Commission approve the Consent Items as listed above. 06-05-2006 .--------... Page 3 The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Rupp, Kirchhoff, Jacobson, Becker, and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being none. Public Hearin~ 1. LeClair Minor Subdivision Preliminarv Plat (Z-05078) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on Preliminary Plat to re-subdivide 1.646 acres and relocate a common boundary to create five single-household residential lots, as requested by Rocky Mountain Engineers, for Ken LeClair, under application Z-05078. The property is located on Kenyon Drive and west of Josephine Park. Public hearing Mayor Krauss re-opened the public hearing continued from March 6, 2006. Planner Jody Sanford presented the staff report. She noted that staffhas reviewed the application in light ofthe applicable criteria and staffs findings are contained in the staff report. Staff has forwarded a recommendation of conditional approval. This project was delayed so that issues related to the extension of Kenyon Drive and other infrastructure issues could be resolved. There are currently four existing parcels one of which, Lot 3, IS un-buildable due to an access easement which crosses the lot providing access to the city water storage tank. The applicant proposes to re-arrange the lots from four to five buildable lots. The property is zoned R-l. The land to the north is currently vacant, although residential development has been proposed, and adjacent property to the east is Josephine Park. There arc currently low density, single family residences to the south and west ofthe property. The Bozeman Planning Board voted 7 - 0 to conditionally approve the application as presented to the City Commission. Three letters of pub he comment expressing concern f()f the impact of street and other infrastructure improvements may have on existing trail system were received. Neighbors to the subject property also expressed concern about the connection of Ken yon Drive, the proposed density of the project and the noise emanating from the communication equipment located on the water storage tank. Additionally, one member of public spoke at the Planning Board public hearing and expressed concern about street connections, density and noise issues. Discussion Ray Center, of Rocky Mountain Engineers, was present for the applicant. Mr. Center noted that the applicant is in general agreement with the conditions, with two exceptions. First, the applicant disagrees with Condition 4, regardlllg the trail crossing lighting. Mr. Center noted that the trail crossing 06-05-2006 Page 4 lighting would be paid for by the owners of the five lots of the subJect property alone and that eIther the City or the property owners in the general area should be responsible for these costs. Mr. Center stated that applIcant also disagrees with proposed conditions is Condition 7, regarding water rights or cash-in-lieu thereof. He stressed that the property has been annexed and subdivided by the City for over 20 years and proposes perhaps water rights or cash-lll-heu for the one proposed addItIonal lot but not all five lots. Otherwise, the applicant accepts the remaining proposed conditions. Mayor Krauss invited public eomment. No publie Comment was received. There being no Cr. objections, Mayor Krauss closed the Public Hearing It was moved by Cr. Kirehhoff, seconded by Cr. Jacobson to approve the Preliminary Plat to re- subdiVide 1.646 acres and reloeate a common boundary to create five single-household residential lots, as requested by Rocky Mountain Engineers for Ken LeClair under applieation Z-05078 subjeet to eonditions as outlined by staff. Cr. Rupp requested of Cr. KIrchhoff to review the GVL T' s March, 2006, letter about safe trail crossings questIoning if that issue is part of the eonditions of approval? Planner Sandford addressed Cr. Rupp's question stating that issues of safe trail erossings are addressed in Condition 4 of the staff report. The trail delineation would be marked by lines painted along the streets. Cr. Rupp noted that in its letter, GVL T also addressed the recommendation to wait on making a deeision regarding a cul-de-sac until a decision was reached regarding the Bozeman Deaconess Hospital property. Planner Sandford responded that GVLT has not prepared new comments concerning the re- applieation. The original comments are all that are available. Cr. Rupp noted that the projects should be eonsidered closer together. Cr. Rupp questioned Planner Sandford about the issue raised by the applicant regarding water rights. He asked what the thought proeess was behind suggesting charging eash-in-lieu for all five properties instead of only the one new proposed property. Planner Sandford responded that as a new policy procedure, applieants are required to either provide water rights or pay cash-lll-lieu if water rights do not exist. City Attorney Paul Luwe clarified that the polley of charging f()r water rights or cash-In-lieu applies to annexations and not subdivisions. He stated that unless a connection can be demonstrated to that subdivision for those water nghts that the City should not be asking for water rights at the subdivision stage. 06-05-2006 Page 5 Public Works Direetor Arkell responded that the subject property was annexed prior to the new annexation policy referred to by Planner Sandford and therefore the applicant would not owe water rights or cash-lll-lieu thereof for this five lot minor subdivision.. Cr. Beeker questIOned Direetor Arkell eoncerning the approximate dollar value for water rights or cash-in-lieu for the subJect five units and the cost per unit for the trail crossing lighting. Director Arkell responded, approximately $532.00 for four units. Director Arkell was not able to provide a dollar figure related to the cost per unit for the trail crossing lighting but confirmed that the cost would include monthly electricity charges and the one-time cost of installatIon. Cr. Becker questioned Director Arkell about city lighting districts to which she responded that there are lighting districts in the newer subdivisions and that ifthe trail crossings arc lit thcy would be a part ofthe lighting district. Cr. Becker then questioned why the trail lighting systems were not included in the existing neighborhood lighting district. Planner Sandford rcsponded that the subject property is not in a lighting district. Director Arkell responded to Cr. Becker's question regarding who pays the power bill by stating that the manner in which Condition 7 is worded, the homeowners pay the power bill. She noted that the City does pay the costs of lighting at certain major intersections and crossings and areas where a single pole is erected at an intersection. Director Arkell continued, typically when a subdivision has a lighting district, the homeowners continue to pay for the power through the lighting district. Cr. Becker questioned Director Arkell about the improvements scheduled to the city water storage tank and the noise emanating from the communications eqUIpment. She responded that the tank will be painted this fall and while there is audible noise from the communication equipment it is not city equipment, it belongs to a private company and space is leased and is revenue generating for the City. Cr. Becker asked Director Arkell if the City takes responsibility for the noise level of the communication equipment. To which she responded that the private company is responsible for mitigating any residual noise emanating from their equipment. Cr. Becker questioned Director Arkell about staff follow-up to e-mail comments by concerned citizens related to public safety Cr. Becker forwarded to her that day. Director Arkell responded that she had met with Director of Public Safety - Fire, Chuck Winn, late in the day but had not received Cr. Becker's request by the time ofthe meeting. Director Arkell noted, however, that the issue of concern is the extension of Kenyon Drive. She stated that the recommendation was to continue Kenyon Drive into the subdivision north of the subject property, and concerns were expressed about possible "cut-through" traffie resulting from this extension. She noted, however that while there may be some additional traffIC, it is unlikely that motorists will "cut through" the subdivision to avoid Highland Boulevard. Director Arkell stated that the last public meeting discussion focused on concerns about cul-de-saes and gates. She noted that at their meeting Director Winn recommended a cul-de-sac with sufficient room to turn around or cOllnectmg Kenyon Dnve but did not recommend gating the street. She stated that from the publIc works perspective especially in the context of snow plowing; either cul-de-sacs or hammerheads are workable. Director Arkell stated that the main issues with the extension of Kenyon Drive to the north is continuity and conneetivity for the neighborhoods. 06-05-2006 Page 6 In response to Cr. Becker, Director Arkell ab'Teed that the potential O'Connell Drive extension opens a greater possibilIty of "cut through" traffic than does the extension of Kenyon Dnve. Cr. Becker questioned whether the stafflS considering any plans for connecting O'Connell to which Director Arkell replied, no, not at the moment. Cr. Becker noted that the extension of O'Connell could have more significant impact on a neighborhood than that of Kenyon Drive. Cr. Becker questioned the safety of the existing trail crossing on Kenyon Drive. Director Arkell stated that the crossing is a safe one. Mayor Krauss stated that on the recommendation of staff that ConditIOn 7 be ehminated from the list of conditiOns. City Attorney Luwe confIrmed this recommendation. It was moved by Cr. Becker, seconded by Cr. Kirchhoff, to amend the previous motion by eliminating condition 7. The motion earned. Those votmg Aye being Crs. Becker, KirchhoU: Jacobson, Rupp and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No bemg none. Cr. Bcckcr noted that Condition 4 should remain in tact. Cr. Rupp repeated that the Commission should be reviewing the two [projects] simultaneously. Decision It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr. Jacobson to approve the Prelimmary Plat to re- subdivide 1.646 acres and relocate a common boundary to create five single-household residential lots, as requested by Rocky Mountain Engineers for Ken LeClair under application Z-05078, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall provide a soils report for the Building Division recommendmg types of foundations, with the final plat. 2. If thc temporary cul-de-sac is installed, an easement for placement of a temporary cul-de-sac on the property to the north (Bozeman Deaconess Health Services) shall be executed prior to submittal ofthe final plat. The easement document and exhibit shall bc submitted to the Engineering and Fire Departments for their review and approval prior to filing at the Clerk and Recorders OffIce. 3. Ifthc tcmporary cul-de-sac is installed, It shall be relocated so that it does not encroach on the linear park; the linear park shall only be crossed by a street section and not part of a temporary cul-de-sac or other approved turnaround. 06-05-2006 Page 7 4. The loeation whcre the linear park crosses Kenyon Dr should be delincatcd in a manner acceptable to thc City Streets and Slgnage Departments, and lighted in compliance with Section 18A2.150.C.6 of the Unified Development Ordinance. The operation and maintenance ofthc trail crossing lighting shall bc paid for by the homeowner's association with the covenants, restnctions, and articles of incorporation fCJf the homeowners' association amended appropriately. 5. The applicant shall move the existing bench, and work With the Parks Department and GVL T to fInd a suitable location for the beneh. Documentation that the bench has been moved, ineluding the new location for the bench, shall be submitted with the final plat. 6. Disturbance to the existing trail, cause by installation of streets and infrastructure, shall be restored in compliance with the City's trail specifIcations upon completion of these improvements. 7. Due to the proximity of these proposed lots to the City of Bozeman water tank, it is imperative that all existing easements and property Jines are not infringed upon by any obstructions temporary, permanent, or otherwise. 8. It should be noted upon the final plat that the existing City of Bozeman water tank contains several pieces of communication equipment and will emit a constant low intensity hum. In addition, an emergency generator is located at this site and is run weekly for an hour and would operate any time there is an emergency power outage within the city. 9. Signage and striping shall be put into place restricting parking in front of the drive access to the water tank. 10. Because of the subdivision's elevation, there may be inadequate water pressure to serve the individual lots without service pumps. 11. A City approved all weather access road will be required to access any sewer manholes that are not located within a public street. If an all weather access road IS installed, it will not interfere with or overlap any publie trails. It is staffs recommendation that the utility easement, all weather access road, and the detention basin be located on a separate lot to the north side of lot 1. 12. An easement will be necessary for any sewer main extension that will extend through parkland or private property. 13. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Unified Development Ordinance. The applicant is advised that unmet code proviSIOns, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 06-05-2006 Page 8 The motion carried. Those voting Aye bcing Crs. Kirchhoff, Becker, Jacobson and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being Cr. Rupp. 2. Steen Family Gara~e COA/ADRlDEV (Z-06073) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on Certificatc of Appropriateness to allow demolition of an eXisting garage and the construction of a 518 sq. ft. garage, with two deviations; permit a 17-foot encroachment into the required rear yard and allow the height of the garage to exceed that of the principal building, on property located at 321 South 10th A venue, as requested by Chuck Steen. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. Planner Martin Knight presented the staff report. The subject property is zoned R-2 and is located within the Ncighborhood ConservatIon Overlay District. The structure proposed for demolition, however, IS a non-contributing structure. In the opinion of staff, the 17-foot encroaehment is acceptable and is in keeping with the character and current pattern of the neighborhood. Theref()re, staff recommends approval of the first deviation. The height deviation is for a 22-foot garage, exceeding the height of the principal structure by 2- feet, 6-inches. Design gUIdelines recently adopted by the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District specifically state that new secondary structures should be subordinate in height to those buildings traditionally seen. Other research in the neighborhood by staff did not show other secondary structures exceeding the height of the principal structure. Therefore, staff recommends denial ofthe second deviation beeause the increased height of the secondary structure would not be consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Mr Knight stated that no public comments were received. Responding to Cr. Kirchhoffs question, Mr. Kmght stated that he was unaware of the existing height of the garage directly across the street from the subject property. Speaking on his own behalf: applicant Chuck Steen is the current owner of the subject property. Mr. Steen stated that he is a tradesman who understands the worry of city planners and the Commission of oversized garages in Bozeman. Mr. Steen stated that the garage design is based on the desire to create more storage space. He noted that the new garage will actually occupy a smaller footprint than the current garage and asked that the CommISSIOn decide the deviation issues on a case by case basIs allowing for the unique circumstances of each applicant. Mr. Steen pointed out that there was indeed an instance in the surrounding neighborhood, on the corner of 5th A venue and Story Road, where the secondary structure was taller than the primary structure. Discussion 06-05-2006 Page 9 It was moved by Cr. Jacobson to deny demolItIOn of an existing garage and the construction of a 518 sq. ft. garage, with two deviations; permit a 17- foot encroachment into the required rear-yard and allow the height of the garage to exceed that of the principal building, on property located at 321 South 10th Avenue, as requested by Chuck Steen, under application Z-06073. Cr. Becker requested clarification of Cr. Jacobson's motion; was the motion on the table to deny the entIre application or deny only the height deviation as outlined by staff? To which Cr. Jacobson responded that in her opinion the denial of the height deviatIOn necessitated the dcnial of the entire application. Cr. Jacobson's motion was seconded by Cr. Becker. Director of Planning Andy Epple noted that the applicant stated that it would be possible, and the applicant was willing, to redesign the roof if the Commission denies the proposed height deviation. Mr. Epple stated that the Planning Department would work with the applicant in order to accomplish the design alteration. Cr. Jacobson questioned Director Epple about an amendment to the staff recommendations concerning the height deviation. Director Epple responded that staff recommended that the fIrst deviation, rear yard encroachment, be approved but recommended denial of the second deviation; garage height exceeding that of the principal structure. Cr. Kirchhoff noted that the applicant made strong arguments. Cr. Kirchhoff recognized and understood the reasoning behind efforts to regulate the size of sccondary structurcs in relation to primary structure but noted that there are certain instances where the rebJUlation is over-restrictive and deviations appropriate. He stated that there was no public comment regarding the height ofthe proposed garage, the viewshed would not be adversely affected and in fact the applicant testified that some neighbors approved of the design. Additionally, Cr. Kirchhoff noted, the garage structure, as proposed by the applicant, maintains the design continuity of the neighborhood. Cr. Kirchhoff stated that he approved of the design as submitted by the applicant and the addition of the structure as proposed by the applicant is helpful to the neighborhood. He agreed with the applicants suggestion that reviews ofthis type of deviations be made on a case by case basis. Cr. Jacobson responded that she would like to rescind her earlier motion as it pertained to the subject property, however, she disagreed with Cr. Kirchhoff. Cr. Jacobson stated that she preferred to approve only after a redesign of the secondary structure such that the height of the secondary structure is the same or lower than the primary structure as recommended by staff She noted that the Commission should maintain consistency when reviewing and deciding on deviations. She also noted that applicants should review building requirements and design the structures accordingly and the purpose for the height restriction is valid and to which the applicant should adhere. Cr. Jacobson withdrew her motion to deny. Cr. Becker withdrew his second. It was then moved by Cr. Jacobson, and seconded by Cr. Becker to approve demolition of an existing garage and the construction of a 518 sq. ft. garage, approvmg a deviatIon to permit a 17-foot 06-05-2006 Page 10 encroachment into the reqUired rear-yard setback and denying the second deviation which would have permitted the heIght ofthe garage to excecd that ofthe principal bUlldmg, on property located at 321 South 10th Avenue, as rcquested by Chuck Steen, under application Z-06073. Cr. Kirchhoff responded that the motion may havc the effect of alicnating citizens by micro- managing those who attempt to improve the bmlt environment. Mayor Krauss questioned Cr. Kirchhoffifhe proposed an amendment to the motion currently on the table to approve the COA as submitted by the applicant which would approve the second deviation allowing the height of the garage to exceed that ofthc principal building. Cr. KirchhofIreplied that, yes, he proposes such an aInendment. It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff, and seconded by Cr. Rupp to amend Cr. Jacobson's motion to approve demohtion of an existing garagc and the construction of a 518 sq. ft. garage, approvmg a deviation to permit a 17-foot encroachment into the required rear-yard setback and denying the second deviation which would have permittcd the height of the garage to exceed that of the principal building, on property located at 321 South 10th A venue, as requested by Chuck Steen, under application Z-06073, and approve the second deviation allowing the height ofthe secondary structure to exeeed that of the principal building as designed and submitted by the applicant. A point of clarifIcation was raised by Cr. Rupp. Cr. Rupp questIOned the content of the original motion made by Cr. Jacobson. Mayor Krauss confirmed that the original motion was rescinded by Cr. Jacobson who then offered a substitute motion, seconded by Cr. Becker, to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness allowing demolition of an existing garage and the construction ofa 518 sq. ft. garage, with approval of deviation for rear yard setback and denial of deviation for height, on property located at 321 South 10th A venue as recommended by staff, under application Z-06073. The motion currently on the table is, however, an amendment to Cr. Jacobson's substitute motion put forward by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr. Rupp, to approve second deviation allowing the height of the secondary structure to exceed that of the principal building. Cr. Rupp questioned Mr. Knight about the height of the secondary structure in relation to the primary structure to which Mr. Knight responded that the proposed height ofthe secondary structure is 2- feet, 6 inches taller than the primary structure at 19-feet 6 inches, the proposed secondary structure rises to a height of 22-feet. Mr. Knight added that staff has included design guidelines in Condition 2 of the staff report which instruct that the roof form of the secondary structures conform to the same design style as the primary structure. In response to Cr. Rupp, Mr. Knight stated that the design condition would apply if the secondary structure roof height was the same as that of the primary structure. Cr. Becker agreed wIth the amendment to the motion as offercd by Cr. Kirchhoff and seconded by Cr. Rupp. Cr. Jacobson disagreed with the notion that the Commission is micro-managing the design of secondary structures by requinng certain height restrictions. This decision would send the wrong message to the public dissuading applicants from conforming to the code requirements during the design phase. Further, she noted, the Commission may earn an unwanted reputation for flexibility in this regard which 06-05-2006 Page 11 may lead to a true micro-management of the process. Cr. Jacobson reiterated that when applicants are in the design phase of any project they should consult with the planning staff in an effort to adhere to the existing codes. Decision The motion to amend carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Kirchhoff, Rupp, Becker and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being Cr. Jacobson. The second vote was to approve the amended motion made by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr. Rupp to approve the Certi ficate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of an existing garage and the construction of a 518 sq. ft. garage, with approval of the fIrst deviatIOn for rear yard setback and approval of the second deviation for heIght, on property located at 321 South 1 oth Avenue as submitted by applicant and subjeet to conditions as outlined in the staff report, under application Z-06073, subject to the followmg condItions: 1. The roof pitch and form shall be constructed to match the pitch on the south elevation of the existing house. 2. To ensure appropriateness, additional details ofthe proposed barn-style garage door, street- side door, and windows shall be submitted for review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 3. The applicant shall provide a detailed color and matcrial palette ofthe new construction for final design rcvicw and approval by Administrative DeSign Review Staff. 4. Prior to issuance of any type of Building Permit (including Demolition Permits), the applicant shall provide a color and materials palette for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 5. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required fees prior to construction, and within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void. 6. This proiect shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of A?propriateness application. Any modifIcations to the submitted and approved drawings shall invalidate the project's approval unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and approval by the Department of Planning prior to undertaking said modifications, as required by Section 18.64.110 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Becker, Rupp, Kirchhoff and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being Cr. Jacobson. 3. Resolution 3920 06-05-2006 Page 12 Public hearing This was the time and place set for the public hearing on Resolution 3920 to amend thc FY 2006 Appropriation Resolution No. 3844 by transferring $1 million from the General Fund and $1.5 million from the Solid Waste Fund to the Library Construction Fund. Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. Finance Director Anna Roscnberrypresented Resolution 3920. She stated that the transfers are necessary in order to properly authorize the purchase of the library and payments to Montana Power Inc. in respect ofthe City's due diligence responsibility as it relates to the library project. The $2.5 million dollars would be deposited into the library constructIOn fund, $100,000 of which will be spent on the MMPI's due diligence project. She noted that the effect ofthese transactions will increase the City's General Fund unreserved cash from approximately $1.3 million dollars to approximately $2.0 million dollars at the end ofFY 2006. Also, she stated, these transactions will decrease the balance ofthe City's unrestricted net assets in the Solid Wastc Fund from $1.5 million dollars but will not affect the monies currently set aside for the closure and post closure monitoring of the City Landfill. Cr. Jacobson questioned Director Rosenberry about the defInition of the phrase "unrestricted asset". To which Director Rosenberry replied that "unrestricted assets" are those assets available in the Solid Waste Fund consisting mainly of cash and land but also includes other available assets; those not currently tied up in liabilities, for example, the closure and post closure monitoring costs. City Manager Kukulski clarified that in the past, the Commission has authorized up to $100,000 in the MMPI agreement however the City is not in possession ofthe invoices so the cost may not add up to the entire $100,000 allocated. He noted that it is anticipated that the final costs will be somewhere between $65,000 and $100,000. Director Rosenberry noted that the City expects invoices to arrive before the end of FY 2006 but ifnot, the invoiced amount will need to be budgeted in FY 2007. Planning Director Andy Epple noted that he and Public Works Director Debby Arkell and staff members met as the Impact Fee Appeal Committee in an unrelated matter, however, during the Public Comment section the appellant, Mr. Ron Millage, commented that it was inappropriate to use solid waste funds to purchase other properties. He was advised to express his concerns directly to the Commission. Cr. Bcckcr questioned Director Rosenberry and City Managcr Kukulski about the practical implications oflowering the unreserved General Fund from 18% to 12%. CIty Manager Kukulski responded that ultimately the City attempts to maintain a General Fund cash reserve at 20% for both cash flow purposes and for the purposes of borrowing money. Hc stated that lowering thc percentage from 18% to 12% is on the low side of where the City would prefer to mamtain the fund and the strategy will continue to be the pooling of all available cash so that cash flow can be met. 06-05-2006 Page 13 AdditIOnally, if the proposed reduction were to occur, rebuilding of the fund would begin Immediately in FY 2007 in an eft{)rt to return the cash reserve to the higher percentage. In response to Cr. Becker's question concerning the affect of the lower cash reserve percentages on the City's bond rating, DIrector Rosenberry stated that it can affect the rating but that would not be known until the City seeks a rating. Cr. Becker questioned the effect on interest rates of a lower bond rating, to which Director Rosenberry stated that a lower bond rating eould raise borrowing interest rates. Cr. Jacobson questioned Director Rosenberry about the library bridge loan. She noted that the loan reduces the unreserved fund from approximately $3 million to $2 million. She questioned when the approximately $1 million bridge loan amount would be repaid to the fund. Director Rosenberry explained that the bridge loan was structured to ameliorate the timing issues associated with the piecemeal fashion in which library donations are received. There will still be an approximately $1.2 million shortfall at the end of the library project which the City will attempt to borrow from outside the City at which time the General Fund can be repaid. CIty Manager Kukulski clarified that the bridge loan involves taking money from several areas, $1 million of which comes from the General Fund. He noted that in the short term there is $2 million coming out of the general fund, $1 million of which will be repaid at the conclusion of the library project once the City borrows from outside sources to complete the project and repays the General Fund. Cr. Jacobson questioned when in FY2007 the $1 million would be repaid to which City Manage Kukulski responded that it would be April 1 or May 1, 2007, once an outside loan is secured to cover the completion costs of the library project. Cr. Jacobson reiterated her point that one ofthe $1 million dollar amounts will be repaid to the General Fund by June 30,2006, meaning that the General Fund will not be less $2 million dollars for very long. There being no Cr. objections, Mayor Krauss closed the Public Hearing. Discussion There was no Cr. discussion. Decision It was moved by Cr. Becker, seconded by Cr. Rupp, to adopt Resolution 3920 to amend the FY 2006 Appropriation Resolution No. 3844 by transferring $1 million from the General Fund and $1.5 million from the Solid Waste Fund to the Library Construction Fund. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Rupp, Kirchhoff and Jacobson 06-05-2006 Pagc 14 Those voting No bemg Cr. Becker and Mayor Krauss. 4. Delancy Mixed Use UDO Text Amendmcnt (Z-06049) Public hearing This was the time and place set for the motion to open and continue the public hearing to July 17, 2006, the text amendment to amend Title 18 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to add a new zoning district, as requested by Mike Delaney. Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. Discussion Cr. Becker questioned why the delay in presenting the amendment. Planning Director Epple responded that the Planning Board needed additional time to evaluate comments and revisions received at the Planning Board public hearing. He added that there is no statutory time limit related to this proposed amendment. Cr. Rupp questioned Director Epple why the issue was placed on the agenda ifthe Planning Board was not prepared to move forward, to which Director Epple responded that the reason for delay may be associated with the applicants travel plans. Assistant City Manager Ron Brey stated that there is a significant difference between postponing the public hearing indefinitely to that of opening and continuing the public hearing to a date certain. He noted that members ofthe public who are tracking the issue and may wish to be heard by the Commission and notice of opening and continuance provide an actual meeting date. Additionally, he stated, that an indefinite postponement would require re-advertisement, thus mcreasing costs of the project. Cr. Kirchhoff noted that he is the Commission's liaison to the Planning Board and he recogmzes the complicated nature ofthe applicant's proposed amendment. He stated that due to the complexities, the Planning Board preferred additional time to review the material. Cr. Becker responded that the applicant requested a timely response. The applicants rcquest was held outside the UDO revision process and the Commission agreed to a timely hearing. Mayor Krauss agreed with Cr. Kirchhoff that if the proposed amendment proceeded too quiekly, without proper analysis, it would not get a fair hearing and would likely be denied. Assistant Director Saunders stated that there are a good reasons why this should be continued. He noted that the question list consists oftwo and one-half pages, the answers to which require detailed responses that are interrelated. Additionally, he stated, there were other high 06-05-2006 Page 15 priority items which, in the interim, required the attention of the Commission. Dccision It was moved by Cr. Kirehhoff, seconded by Cr. Jacobson to continue the public hearing to July 17, 2006 the text amendment to amend Title 18 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to add a new zoning district, as requested by Mike Delaney. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Kirchhoff, Jacobson, Becker and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No bemg Cr. Rupp. Action Itcms I. Adopt Street Maintenance District Capital Improvements Plan FY 2007-2011 Finanee Director Anna Rosenberry presented the long range Street Maintenance District Capital Improvement project list for Fiscal Years 2007 - 2011. Cr. Kirchhoff questioned Director Rosenberry about how the proposed CIP increases were calculated and was the proposed 1 % increase enough. Director Rosenberry responded that equipment needs within the Streets Department is what drove the proposed 1 % increase. Street Superintendent John Vandelinder stated that the equipment requested by the Streets Department is critical to maintaining highly functional operations. Additionally, he stated that the shared purchase of a hot asphalt mix plant will spread the eosts between departments and will utilize recycled material. Finally, he noted that with the number of FTEs currently available the amount of equipment requested is sufficient. Cr. Kirchhoff questioned why the City was not allocating more than 1 % to the CIP Street Maintenance District proposal. City Manager Kukulski responded that the equipment requests are tied to the number of FTEs currently available to operate the machinery. Without an increase in the number ofFTEs it does not make economic sense to purchase more equipment than can be operated. He noted that the City is attempting to strike a balance with equipment and staffing levels in order to increase the ability to perform the street services. Public Works Director Debbie Arkell added that streets is only a small part of the overall CIP. Other projects have priority this year but it is possible streets will be allocated a larger share next year, for example, based on next year's needs assessment. She added that the other issue is related to that pointed out by Mr. Vandelinder, whIch is the number of current FTEs suits the proposed equipment purchases. Cr. Kirchhoffstated that by proposing accurate increases one avoids the potential allegation 06-05-2006 Page 16 that the correct increase amounts were not initially requested when work on the streets falls behind. If larger increases are necessary, they should be requested, he stated. the costs associated with the maintenance of critical functions like streets, water, and sewer are relatively high. He noted that requested increases should be accurately projected. Director Arkell stated that the plan will be revisited next year and needs will be reassessed at that time which may necessItate reallocating some of the funds. Cr. Becker questioned when the City might address the sinage issue which is not addressed III the current CIP Street Maintenance District Plan. City Manager Kukulski responded that he had no intention of delaying the si!,'Tl issue. However, the proposed seven fIgure sinage project seems excessive and we are looking for creative ways to deal with the current regulations and how those regulations are communicated. He added that looking into thc future to, as accurately as possible anticipate needs, is fundamental to the CIP. Cr. Jacobson noted that a total of six new trucks purchased through the CIP will be using alternative fuel (biodiesel). Discussion Mayor Krauss questioned the payback period on the proposed new asphalt hot mix machine. Director Rosenberry directed the question to Mr. Vandelinder. She noted, however, that It is more cost effective to utilize the hot mix machine for repairs than to used a cold patch and subsequently resurface the same area. Mr. Vandelinder stated that the hot mix machine has the potentIal to pay for itself in as little as one year depending on use. Additionally, other entities, governmental and private, have expressed interest in purchasing the hot mix over the winter months. In responding to Mayor Krauss, Mr. Vandelinder stated that progress is being made in scheduling cross-over duties. For example, he noted, the City is considering cross-over snow plowing dutIes from personnel in the Forestry Department who can operate the smaller trucks without a commercial drivers licence. Mayor Krauss suggested tying items in the CIP in with eertain goals, for example snow plowing efficiency, hot mix plant, recycling, etc. City Manager Kukulski noted that the Mayor's suggestion of tying goals in with items listed in the CIP would improve the document as a whole. Decision It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr. Jacobson to approve to update Street Maintenance District CIP ProJect LIst for FY 2007-2011. 06-05-2006 Page 17 The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Kirchhoff: Jacobson, Becker, Rupp, and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being none. 2. Adopt Tree Maintenance District Capital Improvements Plan FY 2007-2011 Finance Director Anna Rosenberry presented the long range Tree Maintenance District Capital Improvement project list for Fiscal Years 2007 - 2011. She noted that this plan is similar to the Street Maintenance CIP, however, numbers fewer items. She also noted that the Tree Maintenance District Capital Improvement project is the only source of funding for the Forestry Division. Discussion Responding to Mayor Krauss, Superintendent of Forestry John Vandelinder, stated that the black ash trees around the City are being affected by physilid, an insect currently affecting only black ash, resulting in slower than average growth and deformity in the leaves. He noted that the affects are severe in states like North Dakota and in some instances affect trees worse than continuing drought. Well watered trees appear to be recovering. He stated that the life cycle of the infestation appears to be three years. Currently the Forestry Department is collaborating with MSU on a strategy to deal with the insects. The infestation is currently not affecting the b'Teen ash tree. Mayor Krauss requested an update on the collaborative efforts between the Forestry Department and MSU at the following Commission meeting. Cr. Jacobson noted that there are three trucks in the long range Tree Maintenance District Capital Improvement proposal utilizing alternative fuels (biodiesel). Decision It was moved by Cr. Jacobson, seconded by Cr. Becker to approve tree Maintenance District CIP Project List for FY 2007-2011. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Jacobson, Kirchhoff, , Becker, Rupp and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being none. 3. Review of Lowe's renewal plan Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders presented a draft Vacancy MItigation Agreement (VMA), vacancy mitigation procedures and a revision to the covenants for, and submitted by, Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse, all of which have been reviewed and approved by staff. He noted that the renewal plan is designed look forward and create a mechanism by which the building can be maintained or converted, if necessary, to another use in an effort to prevent a very large building from sitting vacant for long periods of time. 06-05-2006 Page 18 Cr. Kirchhoff questioned Assistant Director Saunders about the $25,000 requested from thc applicant in the draft Vacancy Mitigation Agreement. Assistant Director Saunders replied that there are a variety of ways the City insures compliance and approval. In some cases thc City requires a financial guarantee. He noted, however, that this agreement may never be executed because the City envisions thc applicant occupying the space for the foreseeable future. The sum held by the City would be used in the event the applicant vacates the property to insure the property is maintained without allocating funds from the General Fund. Cr. Kirchhoff stated that the agreement assumes that if the applicant vacates the facility that thc corporate entity continucs to exist. Assistant Director Saunders replied that while this may be true, if the corporation files for bankruptcy the VMA funds will provide a surety while earning interest. From the VMA, Cr. Kirchhoff noted the list of uses for the subject zoned area. He questioned the course of action if the zoning classifIcation associated with subject facility changes. He noted that perhaps the agreement would be more flexible if the language did not specify a particular zoning classification. Assistant Director Saunders replied that the current language would carry over to any successor revision. Additionally, he stated, the hkelihood of drastic zoning changes in this partIcular area is comparatively low. Susan Swimley, representing the applicant, stated the applicant desires to carry through will all its obligations and if bankruptcy occurs the agreement provides the City with contractual authority to enforce the agreement. She noted that the fund is established for this purpose. Cr. Becker questioned Ms. Swimley about her familiarity with other agreements ofthis type in other cites. Ms. Swiml cy replied that she had consulted other mitigation plans that the applicant is party to and attempted to research others involving the Mitchell Group however, never madc contact with the appropriate Mitchell Group partics. She noted that the draft agreement before the Commission was one that could be a,b'Teed upon by all parties which was drafted from a general model and adjusting where necessary to conform to the neeessary standards Cr. Becker questioned the strength of the agreement. To which Ms. Swimley replied that in her opinion it was a solidly built agreement. Cr. Kirchhoff question cd how diflicult was the negotiation and final decision on the $25,000 mitigation fund. Ms. Swimley responded that the City Manager requested this amount and the applicant 06-05-2006 Page 19 agreed. Discussion Cr. Kirchhoff stated that he had no compelling argument to substantiate a fund amount either greater or lesser than the one proposed. Mayor Krauss stated that this vote was the first of its kmd on this issue but he expects more in the future. Cr. Rupp questioned if this agreement was spawned by the Big Box Task Force and is primarily focused on landscaping and maintenance, to which Assistant Director Saunders replied that there are essentially two applicable sections of ordinance. One relates to retrofitting the buIlding for multiple users, or compartmentalization and the sccond is related to landscaping and exterior maintenanee. Decision It was moved by Cr. Becker, seconded by Cr. Rupp, to approve the Vacancy Mitigation Agreement, vacancy mitigation procedures and a revision to the covenants for Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse. The motion carried. Those voting Aye being Crs. Becker, Rupp, Kirchhoff, Jacobson, and Mayor Krauss. Those voting No being none. 4. Appointment to Parkini: Commission. City Manager Kukulski presented the applicant for the Parking Commission, Paul Burns, to the Commission. There being no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss appointed Paul Burns to replace Jeff Rupp who's initial term expires June 30, 2006. Non-Action Items 1. FYI/Discussion A) Plannmg Director Andy Epple stated that the Impact Fee Appeal Committee met today to hear and appeal of an impact fee assessment. The Committee did provide relief in two funds, water and sewer, but not in two others, streets and fire. Details can be found in the committee meeting minutes. He noted that this was only the second appeal in nine years. B) Assistant City Manager Ron Brey stated that on June 19, 2006, a meeting is 06-05-2006 Page 20 scheduled with the Northeast Urban Renewal Board. The board will be dealing with development issues. C) Public Works Director Debbie Arkell encouraged citizens to vote tomorrow. D) Fmance Director Anna Rosenberry provided notice on how the Finance Department is planning to manage rate increases for FY 2007. She noted that the Finance Department would like to bring all rate increase proposals before the Commission in June, 2006, before the budget is approved. E) City Manager Kukulski stated that the confrontation between a eitlzen and a Bozeman City Police officer was tragic. He noted that the incident is currently under investigation by state authorities and the City should not comment until the investigatIOn is complete. He stated that thc City takes the situation seriously and recognizes the impact on the families involved and on the community. F) Cr. Becker requested that the City address the current Police Department ride along policy. City Manager Kukulski responded that he would prefer that question addressed to Director of Public Safety - Police Mark Tymrak. He noted that Assistant City Manager Brey and he have begun to analyze the issue and are conSidering ways to reVIew and update policy, if necessary. Cr. Jacobson noted that the ride along is extremely informative and important for the public. She advocated for its continuance, if possible. City Manager Kukulski stated that the City wants to make an informed decision on the issue and not overreact or under react to the situation. Mayor Krauss stated that this is a serious time for the officer involved and we should await all the facts from the investigation until then, he stated, the officer, his family and the rest of the department, should be supported by the community. G) City Manager Kukulski distributed a letter, memo and contract from the Emerson Cultural Center regarding their lease arrangement. He stated that he was not comfortable waiving the current lease arrangement unless otherwise advised by the Commission. H) City Manager Kukulski thanked the Commission for the support of the trip to WhItefish. He noted that the staff conducted effective team-building exercises with a professional facilitator and spent productive time with their WhitefIsh counterparts. City Manager Kukulski reminded the Commission of the June 16, 2006, discussions with the officials from Whitefish being held in Bozeman. 06-05-2006 Page 21 Mayor Krauss requested to be kept informed of the plans. I) Cr. Rupp noted that there is a conference callis scheduled with MMPI on Friday, June 9, for which he would be out of town. He suggested that City Manager Kukulski and perhaps Mayor Krauss attend on his behalf. J) Cr. Becker requested an update on the Public Safety - Fire evaluation. Director of Public Safety - Fire, Chuck Winn, responded that he estimates the evaluation will be completed in approximately 30 days. K) Cr. Becker requested a progress report on the City/County 911 mill levy. City Manager Kukulski stated that a progress report would be provided at the next City CommiSSIOn meeting. L) Cr. Becker stated his concern that polIce and fire services be addressed simultaneously. Additionally, he questioned whether a legIslative agenda was being pursued by the League of Cities. City Manager Kukulski responded that he has not yet been in contact with anyone from the league regarding this issue and suggested that the City take a leadership role in this regard by beginning the discussion with the league Cr. Becker offered his assistanee. Mayor Krauss suggested that before meetmg with the league, the City should send a memo or e-mail to all boards and committees soliciting information on issues important to their members. M) Cr. Becker stated that he appreciated the staff and Commissioners who met in Whitefish. He noted that it was beneficial. N) Cr. Jacobson questioned when the study related to future use of the old library building and current City Hall will be available. City Manager Kukulski stated he expects that it will be available in the next 3 - 4 meetings. 0) Mayor Krauss stated that the City has a commitment to the County to organize an Inter-Governmental Agreement Committee. He suggests formalizing the planner who will represent the City on this committee. Planning Director Epple stated that Senior Planner Jody Sanford will represent the city on the IGA Committee and an additional appointment will be made at the next 06-05-2006 Page 22 Planning Board meeting. Mayor Krauss responded that the Commission will make the appomtments but that the Planmng Board should nominate two candidates for their consideration. He stated that the decisIOn of what city planners should sit on the committee should be made as soon as possible. Cr. Jacobson volunteered to represent the Commission on IGA Committee. Deputy City Clerk Devin Harbour stated that the County Commissioners will not be attendmg the June 16, 2006, jomt City/County Commission meeting. Adiournment - 8:28 p.m. There bemg no Cr. objections, Mayor Krauss adjourned the meeting. ~ Ie (L_--/ J e' y K auss, "Mayor ATTEST: Brit Fontenot, City Cl rk I Approved J J tJL ~ '! 2006 06-05-2006