The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2006-02-21 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA February 21, 2006 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met III regular session in the Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, on Tuesday, February 21 , 2006, at 6:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Sean Becker, Commissioner Jeff Rupp, Conllni~~ioner Steve Kirchhoff, Commissioner Kaaren Jacobson, City Manager Chris Kukulski. Assistant City Manager Ron Brey, Director of Public Service DebbIe Arkell, Director of Finance Anna Rosenberry, Director of Public Safety-Police Mark Tymrak, Director of Public Safety-Fire Chuck Winn, Plannmg Director Andy Epple, City Attorney Paul Luwe, and City Clerk Rohin Sullivan. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of AllegIance and a moment of silence. Minutes - AUl!ust 1. AUl!ust 15. September 6. September 12. December 5. and December 12. 2005. and Januarv 17. Februarv 6. and :Februarv 13.2006 Mayor Krau~s indicated that, while he will vote for approval of the minutes, hc does not support approval of the December 12, 2005 minutes as submitted. It was moved by Commissioner Becker, seconded by Commissioner Rupp, that the minutes of the meetings of December 12,2005, and February 13,2006, be approved as submitted. The motion carried hy the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacohson, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No being none. Mayor Krauss deferred action on the minute~ of the meetings of August 1, August 15, September 6, September 12, and December 5,2005, and January 17, and February 6,2006, to a later date. Consent Items City Manager Kukulski presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Acknowledl!e receipt of staff report - annexation of 15.411 acres at northwest corner of intersection of Griffin Drive and Manlev Road - Manlev Commercial Partners. LLC (A-05014) Commission Resolution No. 3889 - intent to annex 15.411 acres at northwest corner of intersection of Griffin Drive and Manlev Road: set public hearinl! for March 20. 2006 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3889 A RESOI~UTION O}' THE CITY COMMISSION O}' 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 {)11' 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 TDEREO}'. 02-21-06 - 2 - Commission Resolution No. 3890 . intent to amend the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan to adopt a sub-area plan for 510 located on the east and west sides of Hie:hland Boulevard. north of Kal!v Boulevard. south of Ellis Street and west of Bozeman Trail Road COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3890 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, STATING THE CITY'S INTENT TO AMEND THE BOZEMAN 2020 COMMUNITY PIAN BY ADOPTING A SlJB-AREA PLAN FOR 510 ACRES LOCATED ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OIj' HIGHLAND BOULEVARD, NORTH 0.' KAGY BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF' ELLIS STREET AND WEST OF BOZEMAN TRAIL ROAD. IN THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLA TIN COUNTY, MONTANA. Commission Resolution No. 3891 - intent to amend the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan to amend the land use desh!llation. as shown on the Future Land Use Map. from "Future Urban" to "Neil!hborhood Commercial" for approximately 3 acres. to "Business Park" for approximately 20 acres. and to "Residential" for approximatelv 217 acres Ivinl! north of Huffine Lane and located at 8553 Huffine Lane COMMISSION RESOI~lJTION NO. 3891 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, STATING THE CITY'S INTENT TO AMEND THE BOZEMAN 2020 COMMUNITY PIAN BY AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM "FUTURE URBAN" TO "RESIDENTIAL" FOR217 ACRES, TO "NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIA!)' FOR 3 ACRES, AND TO "BUSINESS PARK" FOR 20 ACRES LYING NORTH OF HUFFINE LANE AND LOCATED AT 8553 HUIj'FINE LANE, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. Authorize Mavor to sil!n - Findinl!s of Fact and Order for denial of the Amended Plat of Lel!ends at Bridl!er Creek Subdivision - modify conditions of approval to remove restricted size lot (RSL) desil!nation - northeast corner of intersection of StOry Mill Road and Bovlan Road Authorize Mayor to sil!n - Findinl!s of .Fact and Order for Pebble Brook Minor Subdivision - further subdivide 4.77 acres at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baxter Lane and l?erl!uson A venue extended into four lots Approval of final plat for Pebble Brook Minor Subdivision - further subdivide 4.77 acres at the southeast corner of the intersection of Baxter Lane and Ferl!uson A venue extended into four lots Approval of final plat for Valley West Subdivision. Phase 3A - subdivide 19.69 acres extendilll! southward from Durston Road between Ferl!uson A venue and Cottonwood Road into 96 residential lots. park and open space lots. and one remainder lot Approval of final plat for Valley West Subdivision. Phase 38 . subdivide 2.14 acres extendinl! southward from Durston Road between Ferl!uson A venue and Cottonwood Road into 7 residential lots Approval of park master plan for Mill Park W.117-acre park bounded by North Ida A venue. Front Street. and East Aspen Street for the I?reil!htlLofts proiect 02-21-06 - 3 - Approval of park master plan for Vallev West Subdivision (for the parks IviUl:! with the subdivision. which extends westward from Fenmson Avenue between West Babcock Street and Durston Road) Authorize City Mana2er to si2n - Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Pipeline and Access Easement and A2reement from Kevin Ha2eertv - 30-foot-wide easement across Tract 1. COS No. 1182 (extendin2 northward from Stucky Road for Meadow Creek Subdivision) Authorize City Mana2er to si2n - Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Pipeline and Access Easement and A2reement from Marshall and Luann Bennett. Robert L. Weiss. Don Harrv Miller and Jane L. Schaaf (extendin2 southward from Stucky Road for Meadow Creek Subdivision) Authorize Mavor and City M~lOa2er to sien - Aereement between State of Montana and City of Bozeman for $5.500 2rant for historic preservation pr02ram for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Commission Resolution No. 3892 - authorize City Manager to si2n Chan2e Order No.3 for North 19th A venue/V allev Center Road improvement proiect - add $17.166.46 and no calendar days COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3892 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, APPROVING ALTERATION/MODIFICA TION OF CONTRACT WITH JTL GROUP, INC., BELGRADE, MONTANA. Confirm re-appointment of Tim Ford as ioint City-County appointee to the City-County Board of Health. with a three-year term to expire on January 5. 2009 Application for special permit for beer and wine license - Friends of KGL T - Emerson Cultural Center. March 23. 2006 Building Inspection Division report for Januarv 2006 Claims It was moved by Commissioner Rupp, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission approve the Consent Items as listed, and authonze and direct the appropriate persons to complete the nece~sary actions. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote. Those voting Aye being CommIssioner Rupp, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, and Mayor Krauss; those voting no heing none. Public comment No comment was received under this agenda item. Request for 2rant match for purchase of vellow bus - Gala V an Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo forwarding a request for a local funding match for a grant application to acquire busses for a public transit system. David Kack, Western Transportation Institute, distrihuted a handout to the Commissioners. He asked for assistance in creating a general transportation system for Bozeman. He identified HRDC as the recipient 02-21-06 - 4 - of the federal transit funds. They are leveraging the money that GalaVan gets from Bozeman, Belgrade, and United Way, along with money from ASMSU, to create a public transit ~ystem that would also include the Four Corners area. The federal government pays for 86% of each bus, and the busses are $150,000 each, so the local match is $21,000 per bu~. He reque~ted up to two busses and four passenger shelters at a cost of about $6,000 each; the CIty'S share of the shelter~ is $3,360. Responding to questions from Commissioner Becker, Mr. Kack noted that these are not challenge grants. The ~tate gets money from the federal transit fund, and HRDC then asks the state for the federal money. The amount that HRDC contributes has been reduced from 28% to 14o/r, and the DOT is confident the requests will be funded and, if not funded, the money will be returned to the City. Deepu Philip, ASMSU, stated that the students want to help with the system and have put up $90,000; and they are asking the MS U leadership to contribute as well. They hope to start the transit by this commg fall. Jarvis Brown, Transit Now!, raised concerns about the reliability and maintenance. He questioned whether these busses are 7-year busses and noted that larger towns buyl2-year busses. Mr Kack responded that the vehicles are 1 O-year busses. He stated that these busses cost $150,000, and the 12-year bus is about $250,000. The amount contributed is up to the Commission; two vehicles and four passenger shelters is $45,360, while one vehicle and four passenger shelters is $24,360. Responding to questions from CommIssioner Becker, the City Manager replied that the City provides $57,000 to GalaVan, and the money being requested is in addition to the mil. This is a one time contribution. Whether the City will be approached for additional funds is something to be looked at in the future; the past Commission has suggested that we see how successful the program is as to whether more funds are matched for additional busses. Responding to questions from Commissioner Jacobson, the City Manager noted that this comes under the current fiscal year. He noted that there is $100,000 in the general fund contingency, and this is where the money would come from; no amendment to this year's budget would be needed. Mayor Krauss said that two years ago the Commission was asked to support and they voted unanimously; and he is prepared to vote for two busses this time as well. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, that the Commission approve the purchase of a yellow bus. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No being none. Commissioner Rupp abstained due to a conflict of interest. Presentation from Recreation and Parks Advisorv Board regardinl! parkland dedication Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Assistant City Manager Ron Brey fOlwarding information on policies pertaining to parkland dedication requirements and eash-in-lieu that do not seem to be working well. Assistant City Manager Brey noted that over a year ago, work on updating the PROST plan was undertaken, and they have worked through some issues while some need policy changes to put the most beneficial plan in place, particularly in the areas of cash- in-lieu payments, donation of park I ands, and dedication of park lands. These will fall into next year's budget at the earliest, at the direction of the Commission. He noted that most of the changes will involve an Attorney General's opinion and staff time, and staff is currently seeking Commission direction and support. Mr. Sandy Dodge, Chair of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board, clarified that one of the problems is that there IS not a method of parkland acquisition other than dedication. He called attention to some problems that were clarified in the written information dIstributed to the Commissioners. The kinds of parks that the City 02.21-06 - 5 - needs do not necessanly fit into subdivislon~ and aren't going to be built in ~ubdivisions. There are also problems with cash in lieu. The amount of money varies from $26,000 per acre to $87,000 per acre. There is no predictability for developers or subdIvision reviewers. Historically, the city gets about 50 cents per dollar for what they can buy through cash~in~lieu payments; and when momes are accepted, that parkland is gone forever. This makes it dIfficult for the Board to support cash in lieu becau~e it's not a good deal for the City. When looking at developments that are high or low density, cash in lieu is the obvious solution. The Board is looking for an opportunity to pursue parkland and a better system for determming cash in lieu that will be fair and predictable and an amount that is fair to the City. They want authoriLation to pursue attempts to acquire parkland in other ways. If there were other ways to acqUIre parkland, then the Board could look more closely at them. Commissioner Kirchhoff responded that the current system is broken for the reasons outlined. The alternatives seem to be that the City could deCIde what parkland they want, price It, and then seek to get that cost per acre as cash in lieu. Another option is a parkland acquisition district. The po~~ible result is that if that system is established and the CIty wants another complex and pushes the cash in lieu, 600 to 700 acres could he developed without a park. Mr. Dodge responded that it is key that we need to buy parkland and not save up money. The City is looking for infill development and greater density. As we do this, the need for parb increases and we need to protect the parkland. Responding to questions from Commissioner Kirchhoff, Mr. Dodge stated that we would need to check land prices at least annually, but the more often we do it, the less predictable the cash in lieu system will become. He further noted that they are looking for a go ahead hefore they come up with much more specific answers. Commissioner Kirchhoff thinks a task force is a good idea and he 11llagmes the task force taking six months to come up with recommendations and another three months for the Commission to adopt. Meanwhile staff is rewriting the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, and something is needed in the meantime. Responding to a question from Commissioner Jacobson, Mr. Dodge noted that wIth mfill development, development would be approved without getting parkland, but with large, high-density subdivisions, there would be a mixture of dedicated parkland and cash in lieu hecause of the need to meet acreage demands. Mr. Dodge noted that the Board would want to see the dollar amount increased before it was accepted hy the Commission. Mayor Krauss stated that the cash-in~lieu system is governed by statue. He said one of the big issues is that we really can't huy much with the cash-in-lieu funds we receive, or at lea~t nothing really worthwhile. Cash in lieu is the value of the raw land divided by the cost of a city park. The policy to not take cash in lieu and is probably a good idea. Mr. Dodge noted that the Board generally discourages cash in lieu, but sometimes it's a good idea. Mayor Krauss noted that he wishes to explore the legal issues. He also stre~~ed the need to work with the school district when identifying the types of lands we need, and to find land around schools, particularly since a recent law allows developers to dedicate land to schools. The idea of a task force working with the school district has some merit, and active recreation lends itself to this type of parklands: soccer fields versus trail corridors or mini-soccer fields. As density increases, the amount of parkland development becomes prohibitive, creating a Catch-22 situation. The Mayor noted that he would like to see more work done on most of these issues. Assistant City Manager Brey turned attention to the resources to take care of the parks. There are two types of parks: parks that require maintenance and those that don't. The City is placing some maintenance with homeowners' associations. One option under statute is creation of a park maintenance district, which must be placed before the electors. Other issues are what the funds can be used for and the maximum assessment. A final part is that the district must be operated in the same way as a SID, reqUIring an annual assessment. He indicated that, while thIS statute has been on the books since 1999, no City has implemented a district under 02-21-06 - 6 - it. He also reminded the Commission that the first step will be a giant step backwards, because the City will need to take over maintenance for parks that have been placed under the maintenance of homeowners' associations. The City has been approving development with language that notes the homeowners' association requirement to maintain the parks ends when a maintenance district is established by the City. He further stated that the current maintenance is uneven and some parks are taken better care of than others. He proposed that the City create a supplemental fund to go along with the gencral fund. He believes that if we create a separate fund, it will be ObVIOUS to the electors what the money will be used for. He noted that they are requesting Commission direction to look at parkland dedications issues, while cash in lieu will take more effort, and there are statutory requirement~ to look at. Responding to questions from Commissioner Becker, Mr. Dodge indicated that these concerns are not belllg addressed through the update of the PROST plan. Commi~sioner Becker noted that he wants to see the percentage of Bozeman that is under homeowners' associations and the percentage of new construction that i~ under homeowners' assocIations. He noted that if we can identify what people are paying for fees and what the impact would be for them, we can come up with a prudent model that might have preclllcts or sections. He also suggested perhaps we could have specIfic districts vote on whether or not to create a park overlay district. Assistant City Manager Brey responded that he has not heard of this but does not know of a prohibition. Commissioner Becker suggested that this could be investigated. He suggested looking at volunteers, somethlllg that is not really addressed now. Responding to que~tions from Commissioner Becker, Assistant City Manager Brey stated the City is allowed to use private services for maintenance. Commissioner Rupp stated agreement in moving forward. He further said that he feels it's his responsibility to inform the public about the possibilities of future taxes. Mayor Krauss noted that he got elected to make the decisions on issues like these, and he feels the park maintenance district is a little bit behind. It sounds like it could cost a considerable amount of money to assume what is being maintained by the homeowners' associations. He suggested that the City try to get the cooperation of the schools on how we maintain our parks. He also stated that we need to see more volunteerism: adopt a street, adopt a trail, etc. Mayor Krauss noted that the last time the City worked with other groups to create a park was the regional park. Assistant City Manager Brey stated that the Board can come with a recommendation on memhership for a task force, with its creation going through the usual Commission process. It was moved by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Commissioner Becker, that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board work with City staff to bring before the Commission a recommendation for memhership for a task force to review cash in lieu, park acquisition, and parks maintenance and to answer questions raised by the Commission. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Preliminarv plat for Diamond Estates Subdivision No.2. Phases II and III - subdivide 82.19 acres located east of }~landers Mill Road and south of West Oak Street extended into 182 residential lots - Gaston Engineerine: and Survevine: for Doue:las Smith (P-OS071) This was the time and place set for the decision on the preliminary plat for Diamond Estates Subdivision No.2, Phases II and III, as requested by Gaston Engineering and Surveying for Douglas Smith under Application No. P-05071, to subdivide 82.19 acres described as a portion of the South one-half of Section 02w21-06 - 7 - 3, Township 2 South, Range 5 Ea&t, Montana Principal Meridian, into 182 residential lots. The &ubject property is located east of Flanders Mill Road and south of West Oak Street extended. City Manager Kukubkl requested that the Commission po&tpone this discussion until latcr in the meeting. He &tressed the importance of taking action on this agenda item at this meetmg, to avoid the possibility of a 2-2 tie vote, which would prevent the Commission from acting and automatically pass the item due to the oO-day &tatutory limit. Responding to que~tions from Commissioner Rupp, City Attorney Luwe noted that three votes are required to take actIOn and the Commission will be operating with four members for the next three weeks due to Commissioner KIrchhoff being away. The City Manager noted that state statute says that if a project isn't acted upon within the time frame, it is automatically approved. He stated that staff has just requested this be postponed and he isn't sure this is in the best interests of the City. He sugge&ted, rather, that if it's voted down, then the project can be brought back up in a few weeks or a Commis~ioner can bring thi~ back up at a later date. Mayor Krauss postponed this di~cussion due to the scheduled public hearing~. Break - 7:15 to 7:25 p.m. Mayor Krauss declared a break from 7: 15 p.m. to 7:25 p.m. in order to prepare for the scheduled public hearings. Reconsider motion for bus purchase It was moved by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by Commissioner Becker, that the Commission reconsider Its prior motion. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Commissioner Rupp abstained. It was moved by COmmiS&IOner Jacobson, &eeonded by COmmiS&IOner Becker, that the Commission approve the purchase of two yellow busses and four pedestrian shelters. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Jacob&on, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Krauss.; th05e voting No, none. Commissioner Rupp abstained. Growth Policy Amendment - establish sub-area plan on properties located aIODl! Story Mill Road east and north of Brideer Creek Subdivision - Bechtle Slade PC for Churn Creek Partners (P-05056) This was the time and place set for the continued publIc hearing on the Growth Policy Amendment requested by Bechtle Slade PC for Churn Creek Partners under Application No. P-05056, to establish a sub-area plan on 810 acres lying in the South one-half of Section 29 and Section 30, and the North one-half of Section 32, Township 1 South, Range 6 East, Montana Principal Meridian. The subject properties are located along Story Mill Road east and north of Bridger Creek Subdivision. Public hearing Mayor Krauss reopened the continued public hearing. Planning Director Andy Epple presented the staff report. He noted this is a proposed amendment to the land use designation in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. He stated that a sub-area plan deals with a quarter section or larger, whIle a neighborhood plan deals with a small area, generally already developed. This plan is for 810 acres, including 313 acres of Churn Creek development, adjacent properties, and properties across Story Mill Road. One of the conditions for preliminary approval of Churn Creek was a general ized plan for a larger area, including the area west of Story MIll Road and the Rugheimer property to the south. The 02-21-06 - 8 - owners of Churn Creek were asked to develop a sub-area plan with an emphasis on open space and transportation and trail connections. Eight letters had heen received with trail connectivity, less density, larger lot sizes, dark skIes, ndge lines, and traffic on Story Mill Road and North Rouse Avenue being tdentified as key issues. Planning Director Epple reported that staff recommends approval with contingencies and advisory comments. The Planning Board hcld a public hearing and, after a lot of puhlic input, recommended denial. The Planning Board recommended that the developcrs draft a suh-area plan for the landfill and adjaccnt Rugheimer property. Director Epple emphasized that the fundamental question is whether thIS property should be annexed and whether it should he residential and should he included in Bozeman 2020 Communitv Plan and he zoned RS, which is the lowest denSIty. In granting prcliminary approvals, the Commission imposed the requirement that there be a sub-area plan developed and approved prior to further movement forward. Director Epple noted this is the first sub-area plan brought forward in this manner, and identIfied the options available to the Commission, which include approval; disapproval, which will preclude annexation and mUnIcipal zoning; or table with direction to the applicant. He concluded by stressing the importance of providing clear direction to the applicants. Mr. Ron Slade, architect, stated that they have been through a growth policy amendment and a zone map amendment, and they have been receiving approval across the hoard. He clarified that the Planning Board felt that it wasn't right for the applicant to he planning other people's property. The Commission approved the previous application after the Planning Board had given unanimous approval of the design. The reasons the Board recommended denial is that they felt it was not appropriate for the architect to draft the plan, even though that plan had been directed hy the Commission. He stated that the original condition for a sub-area plan has opened the door for denial overall. They have done everything the Commission and the Planning Board has asked of them. Mr. Slade summarized the project as being concerned with many aspects of sensitive development. The development is going to use drip irrigation, maximIze undisturbed land, use permeable paving, and incorporate construction techniques such as high-efficiency toilets, non-toxic pest control, Energy Star appliances, local sources for materials, limited materials taken to the landfill, and orienting homes to maximIze passive solar heating. Steve Ziegler, 2531 Whitetail Road, stated concern for the growth trend to the north and the possibility of having up to two thousand houses on the Bridger bench. He also identified water, sewer, traffic, density, and impacts upon wildlife as concerns. Charles Petrie, 3365 Deer Creek Drive, noted that well planned development goes along with increased economic development. He wants to preserve low density development, which will result in decreased pressure on wildlife, increased wildlife habitat, greater areas of open space, and less impact on the viewshed. He wants to see a less dense development because this development is in everybody's back yard. He finished by stating that development in foothills is irreversible and should be done correctly with all of the community's input. Pat Martin, 2771 Deer Creek Drive, suggested that a community plan needs to be developed for the foothills area. He noted that the Planning Board recommended denial. This project seems to be consultant driven instead of community driven, and added that he wants to see lower density and voiced favor of denial. Larry Merkel, Churn Creek resident, stated concern for the lack of an overall plan and the apparent lack of consideration concerning irrigation. He indicated support for the previous speaker's comments and noted that he is not against the development but wants to see a higher quality. Dave Shaman, 410 North Willson Avenue, questioned the awareness of wildlife corridors and habitat as well as the viewshed. Erin Riles, a graduate student studying riparian issues, stated concern for sewage, noting the underlying rock is mostly gravel and fractured limestone and concern about drainage into the East Gallatin River. 02-21-06 - 9 - Paul Rugheimer, 506 Oxford Dri ve, noted that there are neither standards in place nor policies to follow in dealing with sub-area plans. He was suggested that there should be binding language as well as how specIfic the plan should be and whether the plan should include infrastructure networks. He raised concerns about the lack of procedure, namely that nothing is in place if something needs to be changed lateLHe stated agreement with the Churn Creek development, ~tating that this area is ideally suited for reSIdential development. He noted that the land is mostly brown and rocky and not good for agrIculture and urged the Commission to drop the sub- area plan requirement and approve the development without that requirement. Frank Carter, 120 Twin Pond Lane, questioned why the Commission would want to annex this property. He also expressed concern about the ability of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan to be amended so easily. He asked that the Commission carefully consider the zoning of the entire area statlllg that maybe a new R-20 or R-lO LOning designation might be appropriate. Jennifer MadglC, County Planning Director, stated the County prefers that this type of development be handIed by the City. She &tated that from a planning perspective, it make& &en&e that the City handle the development becauf.,e of the services it has available. The Commission has an opportunity to consider the R-S district to be flexible, or the City can consider a rural type of configuration; but this is the right area for annexation and development. Stacey Ziegler, 2531 Whitetail Road, questioned whether it is it approprIate to expand into our scenic foothills. She also suggested that the Commission look at the concerns about water and traffic on Story Mill Road. She said that the foothills are the last places that we should be expanding into. Don Jack&on, 1280 Story Mill Road, asked the City to look at the review criteria in Section 6.1.3, noting is has specific review criteria before a growth policy amendment can be done. He feels the hias has been towards the land developers and questioned why the &ub-area plan terminates where it docs. He noted that this will set a trend and stated he does not feel infra&tructure issues have been adequately addressed. Brian Dingman, 8645 Lookfar Way, stated that the developers' goal is to present the subdivision in a fashion to gain approval and their goal is to make money, and requested that the Commission consider the other factors in their decision. Judith Heilman stated that &he is afraid that what happened in the Silicon Valley area if., happening here: the green areas are giving way to pavement. She hrought up the need to have enforceable criteria for homeowners' associations to operate by. She also stated concern about losing the bright skies and the wildlife interaction. She encouraged the City, the County, and the citizens to work together in the planning process. Peter Rugheimer, 1404 Story Mill Road, noted that Churn Creek is going to be developed, whether it's in the City or the County. He cautioned that you will get sprawl if it develops in the County, and you still see the houses, but lose the control. In the City, the Commission has the control and they get to decide where everything is as well as connectivity. In the County you will get 20-acre parcels with no trespassing signs. He noted that the developers need and want Commission direction. He noted that the ridgcline requirement was met after City staff told the developers that they didn't want lighting seen from town; and mature vegetation will obscure the houses. Jim Squyres, 8652 Lookfar Way, stated that density is the focus. He took a look at the plot map of the Bridger Mountain Estates and noted that they are 20+ acre lots and that's not the norm. He noted that 2.6 acres is less density than what Churn Creek is putting together. It's a high quality approach and they will be good people to work with; density is something that ha& to be discussed. Doing it smart and having a good plan makes sense. If you apply the size of the lots to the development, you'd be in the neighborhood of 120 lots, not 300, and he questioned whether that is cost effective for the developers. Brian Leland, 528 North Bozeman Avenue, mentioned being concerned with the final cost to city residents. He thinks the developer needs the City more than the City needs this development and questioned whether it can be developed. He noted that if the Commis~ion approves this development, It is locking the City into providing water and sewer questioned how water will be extended to the site. He stated concern for the 02-21-06 - 10- road network and the traffic. He concluded by encouraging the Commissioners to look at the best deal for the City of Bozeman, the taxpayers and the electors Hallie Rugheimer, 1404 Story Mill Road, stated support for the plan. She stated that there have been six reviews over the last eighteen months. She has attended everyone of the meetings, and the applicants have received unanimous approval. Commissioners Youngman and Kirchhoff supported this numerous tllnes. The applicants have gotten the idea that the governing bodies approve this. The Planning Board did not turn down the zone map amendment or annexation; and the Planning Board supports this, but they did not like the sub-area planning process, or requiring the developer to plan the Rugheimer property and the landfill. The sub-area plan proce~s is flawed and needs to be fixed and is not supported by the Planning Board. She noted the Rugheimers have met with the developers, and support their development proposal. She identified the pros and cons of being in the city versus the county: the pros being ridgcline protection, trails to the mountalOs, groundwater protection, Story MIll improvements, taxes, no 20-acre ranehette~, and affordable housing; the cons being more densIty 10 the development. She suggested that the City fix the sub-area plan process before they apply it to another developer. She also requested that if the City doesn't support this, then they should table it, develop a density lirmt, and mutually agree to it. She noted that the comments tonight have come from people who live in the viewshed and now want to protect it. There hcing no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing. Ron Slade noted that a resident may dnll a well on his lot; and the restrictive eovenant~ would allow no additional wells beyond the city hook up. He indicated that improvements will be made to Story Mill Road, and in four to seven years the City will likely improve the road network beyond what the developers are going to do. The applicant is willing to work with the community, as evidenced by the three neighborhood meetings that have been held and the adjustments that have been made as a result of comments from those meetings. The trails connections will provide one mile of connectivity to the mountains; and the open space is 43 percent of the parcel. Mr. Slade said that when they started this sub-area plan, they were directed by staff to come up with road networks, etc, passive recreations designs, and maybe a par 3 golf course. His client went through the expense to gather the additional data. They did the best that they could from a site analysis. Sub-area Plan B offered a series of passive use open space. The Rugheimer property had a different design. He also noted that there is a road plan. Sub-area Plan C suggested maybe an amphitheater and pa~sive open space. He stated that Hallie, Peter, and Lynn Rugheimer were a part of the discussions; Paul Rugheimer didn't want to commit to having another developer plan their land. Sub-area Plans D and E reflect the Rugheimer input, with density decreasmg from west to east. The Rugheimers were uncomfortable that the City had applied planning solutions on their land; and he suggested that each property owner should be able to decide what happens to their land. Mr. Slade said that what they've heard time and time again is that the sub-area process offended more people than it made were happy. To have had unanimous approval from the Planning Board and the entire Commission previously and to be on the verge of a possible denial seems unfair given all the hard work, the stewardship, the working with the neighbors, and the eleven months they have been working on this. He then requested legal counsel; Mayor Krau~s declined offering legal counsel. Responding to questions from Commission Becker. Director Epple stated that the developer had to return to the Planning Board and the Commission for final approval because when the Commission preliminarily approved the amendment to the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, they said that they wanted to see the Churn Creek property in the broader context of properties that are likely to develop in the near future. The Rugheimers have developed some land south of the creek and with the landfill being reclaimed, a portion of that site is potentially available for development. Given the existing tracts to the north, it is unlikely that the City would expand into that area; and to the east are the Dodge conservation easement and the Bridger Canyon Zoning District. The result is that it appears the boundaries of Church Creek will be the limited of city expansion in the foreseeable future. The purpose of the sub-area plan is to make sure that connectivity of roads, trails and open space is assured. He concluded by stating that, prior to final approval, the Commission wanted to see a broader plan. 02-21-06 - 11 - Responding to additional questions from Commissioner Becker, Director Epple stated staff does not believe that development of the subject property will result in development of land from the "M" to Sypes Canyon because of the conservation easement and the zoning district that abut the suhject site. He also noted that the subject property is not part of the Bridger Bench and, in fact, is more of an island. He suggested that, unless this parcel is to remain as agricultural, it should be annexed; that was a decision initially made last fall hut with the requirement for this additional review. He then indicated that the issues currently revolve around the land use plan. He then confirmed that additional work needs to he done before the various processes can be completed. Further responding to Commissioner Becker, Planning Director Epple stated the City and the County are on the same page with traffic and water issues. He indicated that, through the annexation agreement, the City could preclude the drilling of wells except for irrigation and, thus help avoid potential environmental prohlems. Commissioner Becker a~ked about the final co~ts of development to the community, stating that he i~ concerned about mitigating service costs. Director Epple responded that what the City departments do, IS try to identify the aspects of development that should he borne by the developer and not the community. A lot of the review process is to see what point the development has to stop and improvements need to he made. The ruIc of thumb is that residential development does not completely pay its way in terms of tax revenues versus expenditures. For every dollar in services demanded they are paying about 80 cents, which commercial and industrial development pay ahout $1.40 or $1.80 for every dollar of services demanded. Responding to questions from Commissioner Jacobson, Director Epple noted that where there is already a subdivision in place, the potential for further subdivision is minimal. Churn Creek is unusual hecause it's a large piece in single ownerslllp, so it can be developed. He further responded that he's not familiar with whether there are other areas that might develop to the north, although development to the east is re~tricted hecause of the conservation easement and zonmg district. City Manager Kukulski encouraged the Commission to contemplate some the values of both the City and the County and try to determine how those might best be matched. Also, he suggested adding a condition to not allow any wells to be drilled, and a condition to ensure the ridgeline is protected. With respect to riparian protectIon, wetlands, and wildlife corridors, he noted this project has focused on these sensitive things. The City Manager noted the CIty will likely grow to 80,000 over the next few years and, as a result, decisions should not be made based on 35,000 people inside city limits. He suggested that maybe there is a place inside the city limits for density that allows for lower density development. He brought up that the County Commission expressed interest in dealing jointly with the areas around Bozeman, and suggested that the City use this development as an opportunity to work with the County rather than the City denying the project and allowing the County to assume jurisdiction, thus losing all opportunity to have any say on it. The City Manager concluded by noting that this area is contiguous to the city. Responding to comments from Mayor Krauss, Commissioner Kirchhoff noted that the sub-area plan was one of the conditions of approval; and final approval is contingent upon Commission approval ofthis plan. Mayor Krauss noted that he voted for the requirement to prepare a sub-area plan so he would better know how the whole area would develop, not as a condition of approval of the growth policy amendment. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted that it looks like he's changing hi~ mind on this application since he will he votmg opposite of his previous votes on this project. He acknowledged that the City needs to annex areas ripe for development to ensure they are developed in a manner that does not preclude further expansion of the city. He expressed concern that the City is no managing the shelf; rather, the shelf is managing the City. He is also concerned about the cumulative impact that prior Commission decisions is having on the City, with over 3,000 lots now ready to build on, which will accommodate growth for the next three to five years at the current growth rate. He concluded by stating it does not make sense to expand the city in every direction, noting that he believes the result will be to negatively impact the community. 02.21-06 - 12 - CommIs~ioner Rupp stated that he docs not view this. application as being cons.is.tent with where or how he feels the community should grow and, as a result, he will not SUPPOlt this application. Commissioner Jacobson stated she shares Commissioner Rupp's concerns. She was concerned when the annexation, growth policy amendment, and zone map amendment came before the Commission m August. She questions the potential for reaching a population of 80,000, noting she feels that water will limit growth. She finds the Bridgers are a very important aspect of the community, providing a sense of place. She does not want to see the Bridger Foothills covered WIth houses, and she is afraid that approval of this sub~area plan would open the door to this and future development. Commissioner Becker raised the issue of a park maintenance district, suggestmg that the result could be to eliminate fees and provide better service. He then noted this proposed development provides 42 percent open space, and he finds that developing in the city i~ preferable to development in the county because of the additional requirements and protections. He stated the concerns about water and the watertable will be even greater is~ues if development does not occur inside city limits. He then indicated that many of the concerns raised involve issues addressed at subdivision. He conduded by stating he views this. as an opportunity for the City and noted he wants to see the type of subdivis.ion that best fits the area. In response to Commissioner questions and concerns, Mr. Slade requested that the Commission delay its deciSIOn for thirty days to give the applicant an opportunity to respond. Responding to questions posed by Commissioner Kirchhoff, Mayor Krauss stated that, because of his time as County Treasurer, he has a unique perspective on issues involving city and county zoning. He noted that preservation of land and respect for existing landscapes is important, and he finds this plan is innovative and respons.ive, with 43 percent of the land being in open space and much of it accessible to the public. He favors removing the requirement for a sub-area plan, which has triggered this public hearing process. He noted the County Planning Director has urged the City to annex the property and provide for development within city limits.. He cautioned that care must be taken to ensure the city is not surrounded by a ring of low-density development on wells and septic systems; and those properties do not contribute toward the costs of the city services that they use. He further noted that the City has asked the County to send proposed development contiguous to the city to the City for annexation prior to development, and to not do so would be counter to that prior action. He concluded by stating that he had prevIOusly voted for annexation of this property and wIll continue to support annexation and development of this property within city limit&. City Manager Kukulski stated that, if a majority of the Commissioners do not wish to approve this application, then the decision should not be delayed for thirty days; rather, the Commission should take action at this time. Responding to questions from Commiss.ioner Becker, Director Epple noted that density issues can be discussed more effectively now than at a future stage. Commissioner Rupp noted that his decision is not based on the beliefthat 20 acre parcels is a better way to grow. instead is based upon the application currently before the Commission. He stated that he does not support this application, noting he has not changed his position since this development was first proposed. Commissioner Jacobson said that she believes the majority of the community does not favor this type of development and, as a result, does not support it. Decision It was moved by Commissioner Becker that action on the sub-area plan be tabled to March 27, and that direction be provided to the applicants regarding how it may need to be revised to gain approval by the Commission. The motion died for lack of a second. It was moved by Commissioner Rupp, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission approve the Growth Policy Amendment requested by Bechtle Slade PC for Churn Creek Partners under 02-21-06 - 13 - Application No. P-05056, to establish a sub-area plan on 810 acres lying in the South one-half of SectIOn 29 and Section 30, and the North one-half of SectIOn 32, Township 1 South, Range 6 East, Montana Principal Meridian, subject to the following conditions: 1. The Sub-area Plan, which addresses al1 contmgencies and recommendations by the City Commission, shal1 be returned to the City of Bozeman Planning and Community Development Department within 45 days of a City Commission decision or the Sub- area Plan shall be null and vOId. 2. The applicant shall submit 4 bound copie~ of the Sub-area Plan entitled "Churn Creek Sub-area Plan" and a digital copy of the plan for review and approval by City Planning Staff prior to formal adoption of the annexation agreement. The plan shall duplicate the format and content of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan. 3. The resolution for the Growth Policy Amendment for formal adoption of the Sub-area Plan shall not be drafted until the final draft of the Sub-area Plan is revIewed and approved by City Planning Staff. The motion failed by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being C()mmi~sioner Becker and Mayor Krauss; those voting No being Commissioner Rupp, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Commissioner Jacobson. Break - 9:56 p.m. to 10:04 p.m. Mayor Krauss declared a break in accordance with Comnnssion policy. Certificate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of two-story enclosed rear patio. partial demolition. remodel and relocation of existine: detached four-car e:arae:e to become attached two-car e:arae:e. construction of rear addition with two covered porches. and construction of 4-foot and 7 -foot hie:h fences with deviations to allow rear addition and two-car 2ara2e to encroach 16 feet into required 20-foot rear yard setback. and to allow 226 linear feet of fence exceedin2 6 feet in hei2ht on property line - Michael Delanev and Ileana Indreland for 415 South Willson Avenue (Z-0530l) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Michael Delaney and Ileana Indreland under Application No. Z-05301, to allow demolitIOn of an enclosed rear patio and partial demolition, remodel and relocation of an existing detached four-car garage to become an attached two-car garage, with construction of a rear additIOn with two covered porches on Lots 4 through 10, Block 2, Fairview Addition, with deviations from Section 18.16.050, to allow the rear addition to the existing house and the attached two-car garage to encroach 16 feet into the required 20-foot rear yard setback, and from Section 18.42.130 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to al10w 226 linear feet offence exceeding 6 feet in height to be located on the lot line. The subject property is located at 415 South Willson A venue. Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Historic Preservation Planner Bristor requesting that the public hearing be continued to February 27 in light of the need to re-advertise the project due to the addition of requested deviations. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Rupp, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, that the public hearing he continued to February 27, per the staffs request. The motion carried by the fol1owing Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Rupp, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Commissioner Kirchhoff was out of the room. 02-21-06 - 14 - Annexation of 75-acre parcel located at southwest corner of intersection of' Huffine Lane and Cottonwood Road - Covenant. LLC (A-05013) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the request for annexation of a 75-acre parcel described as Tract 1, Certificate of Survey No. 24, and all of the parcels in Certificate of Survey No. 25, as requested by Covenant, LLC, under Application No. A-050 13. The subject property lies at the southwest corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane and Cottonwood Road. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Susan Kozub presented the staff report. She noted the applicant is seeking annexation with a mix of zoning designatIons. There are ~evefi.tl buildings currently on the site, including a shed, a barn, and a warehouse; and Baxter Creek begins on the northern boundary. There has been no public comment received on the requested annexation. The Planner noted that staff has reviewed this application in light of the goals and policies set forth in Commission Resolution No. 3137, and staffs comprehensive findings arc contained in the written staff report. Based on those findmgs, staff has recommended approval ofthe requested annexation, subject to the following items being addressed prior to or in conjunction with the annexation agreement: I. The Annexation Agreement shall include the following language from Chapter 18.60 of the Bozeman Municipal Code regarding the warehouse: "Whenever a lawful non- conforming use of a building, structure, or land IS discontinued for a period of 90 days, any future use of the building, structure, or land shall be in conformity with the provisions of this title." 2. The Annexation Agreement shall include the following language: "Existing mature vegetation shall be saved and relocated within the subject property, to the maximum extent feasIble." 3. The Annexation Agreement shall include the following language: "The existing barn shall be maintained in its current location and incorporated into the new site design. If the barn IS not able to be incorporated into the new site design, it shall be relocated to a park within the project boundaries. If a structural report by a professional engineer indicates that the barn is not feasible to relocate, the developer will be required to complete a Montana Historic Property Record Form for review by the local and state historic preservation offices." 4. A cultural resource inventory or a letter from the State Historic Preservation Office indicating a cultural resource inventory is not necessary shall be submitted to the City Planning Office with the signed Annexation Agreement. 5. The existing warehouse and residence shall either be connected to municipal water and sewer upon annexation of the property and availability of service or removed from the property. The barn shall also be connected to municipal water and sewer if converted to a use which requires services. 6. The landowner understands and agrees that to achieve the goals and objectives set forth in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, any contiguous parks, open space, and/or trails shall be extended to the annexed property, and a Master Plan of Said parks, open space and trails shall be provided with the signed annexation agreement. 7. The landowner acknowledges and agrees that future development will comply with the goals and policies of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and, having recognized the 02-21-06 - 15 - City's concern for Implementation of progressive urban de~Ign gUIdelines outlined in the Boz.eman 2020 Community Plan for hoth commumty and neighborhood design, a mastcr plan of the land use patterns and types for development of the property that addresses compatibility with and sensitivity to the immediate environment of the sIte and the adjacent neighborhoods relative to architectural de~ign, buIlding mass and height, neighborhood identity, landscaping, historical character, orientatIon of buildings, and vi~ual mtegration shall he provided with the ~igned annexatIon agreement. 8. A detailed wetlands map and summary report shaIl he suhmitted for the suhject property with the signed annexation agreement. The map must be depicted on an I X- inch by 24-inch paper copy and a compact disk in accordance with Scction 18.56.050 "Wetlands Mapping." 9. That the applicant execute at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder's Office a waiver of right-to-protest creation of Special Improvement Districts for a City-wide Park Mall1tenance District, which would provide a mechanism for the fair and equitahle assessment of maintenance costs for city parks as paIt of the annexation agreement. 10. At the time of annexation, the landowners shall pay all street and fire impact fees that are attributable to the structures. At the time of connection to the City's water and sewer facilities, the landowners shall pay all applicable water and sewer impact fees. The applicants should be made aware that at the time of any further development on the properties, the landowners or their successors shall pay all additional impact fees required hy Chapter 3.24, Bozeman Municipal Code. 11. That provisions for water rights or cash-in-lieu of water rights in an amount determined by the Director of PublIc Service be provided in the annexation agreement whereby it is executed by the landowner prior to final suhdivision plat approval, final site plan approval, or issuance of any building permits, whichever comes first, prior to the City Commission adopting the resolution of annexation and accepting the annexation agreement. 12. The final annexation map and legal metes and bounds descriptions shall include the full width of all adjacent rights-of-way. Note that the metes and bounds descriptions for adjacent rights-of-way must be described separately from that of the parcel. The applicant is responsible for obtaining any required affidavits or signatures from the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) and/or Gallatin County. 13. The annexation agreement, which addresses all terms placed on the annexation application by the City Commission, shall be returned to the City of Bozeman Planning and Community Development Department within one year of a City Commission decision to annex the property, or annexation approval shall be null and void. 14. An annexation map, titled "Loyal Garden Annexation," with a legal description of the property shall be submitted by the applicant for use with the Annexation Agreement. The map must show the existing public utilities (water, ~ewer, roadways and storm drainage), improvements on the property, adjacent developments (subdivision name, block and lots), fIghts-of-way, and public easements within and adjacent to the property. The map must be supplied on a: 1) IS-inch by 24-inch mylar for City records; 2) a reduced 8Y2-inch by II-inch or 14-inch exhibit for filing with the annexation agreement at the County Clerk and Recorder; and 3) a digital copy for the City Engineer's Office. This map must be acceptable to the Director of Public Service and City Engineer's Office, and shall be submitted with the signed annexation agreement. 15. Applicant shall provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed waivers of right to protest creation of Sills for the following: 02-21-06 ~ 16 - A. Street improvement~, mcluding but not limited to, paving, curb/ gutter, sidewalk and storm drainage facilitIes for the following streets: 1. Cottonwood Road 2. Huffine Lane B. SignaliLatlOn improvements for the following intersection: 1. Huffine Lane/Cottonwood Road C. Trunk sewer and water mains to serve the property. The document& filed &hall specify that in the event an SIn is not utilized for the completion of these improvement~, the developer agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said improvement~ on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the prope/1y, traffic contribution from the development or a combination thereof. 16. Public street and utility casements shall be provided for Cottonwood Road and Huffine Lane unless adequate right of way already exist&. The easement shall be 60 feet wide (half of the principal arterial standard) for both streets. Planner Kozub noted that there are three option& available to deal with the existing barn: (1) keep the barn, (2) relocate the barn within the property, this would decrease the hi~toric value, or (3) demolish the barn and properly document the destruction with the State. She indicated the applicant want~ the possibility to relocate the barn to anywhere on the prope/1y. Associate Planner Kozub noted that the applicant has voiced concerns about propo~ed Items 3 and 5, and cautioned that Item 5 is a code issue. Rob Pertzborn, architect representing the applicant, encouraged the Commis&ion to strike the words "to a park" in Item 3, to allow them to move the barn off the property. Mr. Pertzborn noted that the applicant wants to remove the warehouse withm about three years, but wants the language to state that they have up to five years to remove the structure. He questioned the need to install a bathroom, sprinkle, and pay the impact fee requirement, only to tear the building down. If the applicant has to pay all of this, the structure might stay. The applicant wants Item 5 to say that they arc required to hook up when service& become available instead of immediately. He also noted that with the expansion of Cottonwood Road, the house will be removed as well a~ the mature trees. Judith Hidelman asked if the applIcant will be required to replace the evergreen trees within the setback if they are removed. Project Engineer Bob Murray addressed Item 5, noting that according to the municipal code, any building used for human occupancy, employment, or recreation must be connected to city services. He's been at the site one time, and Mergenthaler employees were working there. There IS a porta-potty on the site, showing the need for facilities. He concluded by stating that, as long as the warehouse is being used for business, it should be connected. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked ifthere arc any precedents to support approving the applicant's request. He suggested an alternative would be to eliminate the warehouse immediately, unles& the business has a lease that it wishes to retain. Responding to que~tions, Associate Planner Kozub noted that three trees wil I be required along the road frontage. 02-21-06 - 17 - Mr. Pertzborn noted the owner has contacted a company that will try to move the trees, and there is a SO/50 chance they wIll survive; also, there are fruit trees elsewhere on the propelty that will be removed. Mr. Pertzhorn noted that the porta-potty was provided by the owner, who didn't want to be bothered by people needing to go the bathroom or having people relieve themselves on site. There is no desk there; Mergenthalers comes every few days to swap out some crates. He stated that,just because there is a porta-potty there, that docs not indicate there is a need. Responding to questions from Commissioner Becker, Mr. Pertzborn reiterated his request to reword Item 5 to read, "to eIther be connected or removed within five years." Project Engineer Bob Murray disagreed, stating that there if> a need, and in five years nobody will remember that this needs to be done. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss closed the publIc hearing. Decision Responding to questions from Commissioner Rupp, Associate Planner Kozub responded that connectiVIty to the city is across Huffine Lane to the north. It was moved by Commissioner Becker, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission authorize and direct staff to bring back an annexation agreement addressing Item Nos. 1 throughl6, listed above, for consideration, with the exception that Item No.3 he amended to read as follows: 3. The Annexation Agreement shall include the following language: "The existing barn shall he maintained in its current location and incorporated into the new site design. If the ham if> not able to be incorporated into the new f>Ite design, It shall be relocated within the project boundaries. If a structural report by a professional engineer indicates that the ham is not feasible to relocate, the developer will be required to complete a Montana Historic Property Record Form for review hy the local and State Historic Pref>ervation Offices." The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Commissioner Jacobson; those voting No being Commissioner Rupp and Mayor Krauss. Zone Map Amendment - establish initial municipal zonin!! desi!!nations of "R-!". "R-2". R-3". "R-4". and "R-O" on 75-acre parcel located at southwest corner of intersection of Huffine Lane and Cottonwood Road - Covenant. LLC (Z-05278) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Zone Map Amendment requested by Covenant, LLC, under Application No. Z-05278, to establish a mix of initial municipal Laning designations on a 75-acre parcel described as Tract 1, Certificate of Survey No. 24, and all of the parcels in Certificate of Survey No. 25, as follows: "R-l," Residential-Single-household, Low-density, on 22.8 acres; "R-2," Residential-Two-household, Medium-density, on 27.6 acres; "R-3,", Residential-Medium-dcnsity, on 10.6 acres; "R-4," Residential-High-density, on 4 acres; and "R-O," Residential-Office on 10 acres. The subject property lies at the southwest corner of the intersection of Huffine Lane and Cottonwood Road. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the puhlic hearing. Associate Planner Susan Kozub presented the staff report. She stated that staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria, and staffs findings were contained in the written staff report. Based on those findings, ~taff has forwarded a recommendation for approval, subject to three standard 02-21-06 - 18 - conditions. She indicated that, at the Zoning Commission meeting, one person spoke, expressing concerns about traffic, groundwater, and the watercourse. Mr. Pertzborn indicated a willingness to respond to questions. No one spoke in opposition to the requested zoning designations. Since there were no Commissioner obJectIOns, Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing. Decision It was moved by Commissioner Rupp, seconded by CommissIOner Kirchhoff, that the Zone Map Amendment requested by Covenant, LLC, under Application No. Z-05278, to estahlish a mix of initial municipal zoning designations on a 75-acre parcel described as Tract I, Cel1ificate of Survey No. 24, and all of the parcels in Certificate of Survey No. 25, as follows: "R-I ," Residential-Single-household, Low-density, on 22.8 acres; "R-2," Residential-Two-household, Medium-density, on 27.6 acres; "R-3,", Residential-Medium-density, on 10.6 acres; "R-4," Residential-High-density, on 4 acres; and "R-O," Residential-Office on 10 acres, be approved subject to the following conditions: I. The ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not he adopted until the annexatIon agreement is signed hy the applicant and formally approved by the City Commission and the resolution of annexation adopted. If the annexation is not approved, the application shall be null and void. 2. The applicant shall suhmit a zone amendment map on a 24-inch by 36-inch mylar; 8V2- inch by II-inch, or 8V2-inch by 14-inch paper exhihit; and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, which will be utilized in the preparation of the ordinance to offiCIally amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property and zoning districts, total acreage of the property and adjoining rights-of-way and/or street access easements. 3. The ordinance for the Zone Map Amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant provides a metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed Montana surveyor and map of the area to be rezoned, which will be utIlized in the preparation of the ordmance to officially amend the lone map. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Rupp, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Preliminarv plat for Annie Subdivision. Phase IIIB - subdivide 1.5 acres at southeast corner of intersection of Annie Street and North 25th A venue into 7 lots for residential use - Gaston Engineerine: & Survevine: for Roe:er and Rosalind Smith (P-05068) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the preliminary plat for Annie Subdivision, Phase IIIB. as requested by Gaston Engineering and Surveying for Roger and Rosalind Smith under Application No. P-05068, to subdivide 1.5 acres described as a portion of Lot 1, Annie Subdivision, Phase II, into seven lots. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Annie Street and North 27th A venue. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public heanng. Plannmg Director Epple presented the staff report on behalf of Contract Planner Lanette Windcmaker. He noted the subject property is located south of Emily Dickinson Elementary School, in the last phase of 02-21-06 - 19 - Annie Suhdivision. He noted that five of the lots are to he single-hou~ehold, with the other two planned for four-plexes. The Planning DIrector stated that staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criterIa, and staff's comprehensi ve findings are contained in the written staff report. Based on those findings, staff has forwarded a recommendation for approval, subject to several condition~. The Planning Director stated that the Planning Board conducted its public hearing on this application, and has concurred in staff's recommendation for approval. He indicated that neighbors have voiced concern about the existing stormwater detention area, which is not part of this development, and the location of four- plexes next to single-family lots. He mdicated that staff feels the proposed four-plexes are appropriate, noting that it carries out the desire for a mix of housing types. Concern was also expressed about the block length, but staff feels it IS appropriate to vary from the standard because there is no opportunity for a connection or ~treet. Responding to questions from Commissioner Becker, Director Epple stated that he's not sure about the legality of pulling this property into a homeowners' association. No one was present to speak in support of or in opposition to the reque~ted subdivision. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing. Decision Responding to questions from Commissioner Rupp, Director Epple noted there is a weed control ordinance on the books, which is enforced by the City's Engineering Department. It was moved hy Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, that the preliminary plat for Annie Subdivision, Phase lIlB, as requested by Gaston Engineering and Surveying for Roger and Rosalind Smith under Application No. P-05068, to subdiVIde 1.5 acres described as a portion of Lot 1, Annie Subdivision, Phase II, into seven lots be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The watercourse setback shall be designated as a public access easement, common open space for ownership and maintenance of the homeowners' a~soClatIon. 2. The final plat shall provide a joint access easement between Lots 1 and 2, and either Lots 3 and 4 or Lots 4 and 5, and Lots 6 and 7. The access easement shall be situated on the common lot line of the lots and shall comply wIth Section 18.44.090.C. 3. Pursuant to Section 18.42.040, the Planning Office will be able to support a block length in excess of 400 feet in width to overcome the specific disadvantages of orientation due to the location adjacent to an existing block in excess of 400 feet in width without a connecting right-of-way for a pedestrian walk. 4. Water rights or cash-in-lieu thereof, as calculated by the Director of Public Service, is due with the final plat. 5. Applicant shall provide a soils report, along with building plans, to the Building Division, recommending types of foundations. If development shall occur in phases, the soils report may address those lots within the proposed phase. 6. The final plat shall comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal Code. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval docs not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 02~21-06 - 20- 7. The subject propel1y is located within the Far West SID No. 621 f-.ewer and the HRDC water payback districts. Paybacks shall be made prior to filing the final plat. 8. Plans and specifications and a detailed design report fur water and sewer main extensions, storm sewer and the public street, prepared by a professional engIneer, shall be provided to and approved by the City EngIneer and the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant f-.hall also provide professional engineenng services for construction inspection, post-construction certification, and preparation of mylar record drawingf-.. Construction shall not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been approved and a pre- construction conference has been conducted. No building permits shall be issued prior to substantial completion and City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements. 9. All infrastructure improvements including I) water and sewer main extensions, and 2) public streets, curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting parks, open space, rear yard frontages or other non-lot frontages, and related storm drainage infrastructure improvements shall be financially guaranteed or constructed prior to final plat approval. CIty f-.tandard residential f-.idewalks shall be constructed on all public street frontages of a property prior to occupancy of any structure on the property. Upon the third anniversary of the plat recordation of any phase of the subdivision, any lot owner who has not constructed said sidewalk shall, without further notice, construct within 30 days said sidewalk for their lot(s), regardless of whether other improvements have been made upon the lot. This condition shall be included on the final plat for the subdivision. 10. The location of existing water and sewer mains shall be properly depicted. Proposed main extensions shall be noted as proposed. 11. Flood plain: a) The 100 year flood plain boundary must be shown on the final plat. 12. The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, SCS, Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Army Corps of Engineers f-.hall be contacted regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be obtained prior to final plat approval. 13. The developer shall make arrangements with the City Engineer's office to provide addresses for all individual lots in the subdivision prior to filing of the final plat. 14. The applicant shall submit a construction route map dictatIng how materials and heavy equipment will travel to and from the site in accordance with Section 18.74.020.A.l of the Bozeman Municipal Code. This shall be submitted as part of the final site plan for site developments, or with the infrastructure plans for subdivisions. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the construction traffic follows the approved routes. 15. All construction activities shall comply with Section 18.74.020.A.2. of the Bozeman Municipal Code. This shall include routine deaning/sweeping of material that is dragged to adjacent streets. The CIty may require a guarantee as allowed for under this section at any time during the construction to ensure any damages or cleaning that are required are complete. The developer shall be responsible to reimburse the City for all costs associated with the work if it becomes necessary for the City to correct any problems that are identified. 02-21-06 - 21 - 16. Annie Street shall he improved from North 25th Avenue to the end of the exi:o.ting improvements to the cast. This shall include curb and gutter on both ~ldes, :o.idewalk on the south side only, and the necessary utilIty extenf,iom,. The f,ldewalk may be installed with the houses as allowed hy code. 17. No building permits shall he issued until the eonstmctIon contract for the Durston Road SID project has been let. 18. SInce the previous preliminary plat approval on this suhdi vision. four-way stop control has heen added to the Intersection of North 25th A venue and Annie Street. Therefore, the installation of curb bulbs is no longer required. 19. As part of the street improvements, the applicants should coordinate with the utility company to have the hox on the southeast quadrant of the intersection relocated out of the right of way and into the utility easement so that the sidewalk can be Installed in the proper location. The motIon earned by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Preliminarv plat for Oak Meadows Subdivision - subdivide 20 acres at southeast corner of intersection of West Oak Street and North 14th A venue extended into 52 residential lots - Allied Eneineerine Services. Inc.. for RAM Properties (P-OS074) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the preliminary plat for Oak Meadows Subdivlf,ion, as reque:o.ted by Allied Engineering Services, Inc., for BAM Properties, under Application No. P- 05074, to f,ubdivide 20 acres described as Tract A, Certificate of Survey No. 2439. The subject property is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of West Oak Street and North 14th A venue extended. Commissioner Becker noted a cont1ict of interest, and stated he will abstain from voting per City Attorney Luwe's recommendation. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. Assistant PlannIng Director Chris Saunders presented the staff report. He noted this property has been annexed for eight years, and is bordered by Walton Subdivision to the west, the Gallatin County Rest Home to the south, West Oak Street to the north, and agricultural land to the east. Assistant Director Saunders noted that the Planning Board held its public hearing on this application and failed to forward a recommendation for approval. He noted their main concern was connectivity with Huckleberry Drive. The property is infill; it is surrounded by city development and is served with water and sewer. Assistant Director Saunders stated that staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria, and staff's comprehensive findings are contained in the written staffreport. Based on those findings, :o.taff has forwarded a recommendation for approval subject to several conditions. He then indicated that the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board did recommend accepting a cash-in-lieu payment for a portion of the parkland dedication. Commissioner Rupp asked for clarification about the concerns raised by the Planning Board. He noted that vehicle access would come from a public alley, and pedestrian acce:o.s would be from the south via a 02-21-06 - 22 - greenway. He then noted there is a clause that allows a park to have less than 100 percent strect frontage, and he finds the sIte constraints on this propcrty arc sufficient to allow that. CommiSSIOner Kirchhoff notcd that Planning Board wanted Huckleberry Drive to connect and there were desIgn choices to not have It connect and to align the block:-. the way they did. Becausc of the way people chose to lay this out, they don't have a road connection. Responding to questions from Commissioner Rupp, Assistant Director Saunders noted there was discussion about dividing the R-410ts into freestanding homes, which would limit the number of homes that could he hUllt. Responding to questions from Commissioner Jacobson, Assistant Director Saunders noted that RSLs can be no more or less than 5,000 square feet; ifit's a townhome lot, it can be 3,000 square feet; you and those lots can be aggregated with thc result being less than 3,000 square feet for a given lot. Steve Miller. applicant, noted that this subdivision will hring higher density into the CIty, and access to amenities closer to the citizens of Bozeman since shopping, schools, and parks are all within walking distance of this development. He noted that the Planning Board was concerned with the R-4 area and the development of the linear park. He drew attention to the renderings, noting that one, two and three-bedroom units are to he provided the R-4 zone. He suggested the linear park will promotc pedcstrian activity throughout the three-acre park and draw traffic to the center of the development. He then identified the safety of children as a key component in this development. He finished by stating that he is open to Commission input. .Tames Nickelson, Morrison and Maierlc, addressed street connectivIty and how the development works with existing street network. He noted there are no east/west streets in the area, and access to West Oak Street is limited hecause it is an arterial roadway. He stressed that this is a suhdivision review, creating lots only, and not looking at huilding specifics. Neal Ainsworth voiced concern about the connection of the pedestrian spine that the linear park provides, particularly since one cannot access the park without crossing at least one street. He indicated that generating as much green space as possihle was one of the desires for this development, and the setback from West Oak Street is to he greater than the 50 feet required. He indicated there will be a 12-foot-wide paved path in the linear park, which is anticipated to lie within a 70-foot-wide corridor hetween buildings. He concluded by stating he believes this development wIll be a positive addition to the community and the neIghborhood. Cade Emery voiced support for the proposed subdivision, noting it will provide affordable housing with open space, and the result will he to limit sprawl while creating a nice development. Andrew Miller spoke in favor of the suhdivision, noting he likes the linear park that connects the residences to the park. Frank Benjamin, Belgrade, mdicated that he would like to build a home for his family on one of the RSL lots. Chris Ford, local builder, likes the layout and the location of the subdivision and he supports it. The applicant asked about the RSL lots and noted that there was some discrepancy about the two lots that front the park. He suggested that one of the RSL lots could possibly be used as a model home in the subdivision. Rusty Harris, Think One, stated he feels this is a great neighborhood that meets the U DO standards and is right for this property. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing. 02-21-06 - 23- Decision Responding to questions from Commissioner Rupp, Assistant Director Saunders noted that :'.ome of the narrower lots are townhouse lots and, as a result, can be smaller than the 5,OOO-square-foot standard for RSL lots. Responding to questions from CommIssioner Jacobson, Assistant DIrector Saunders noted that parking will he from the alley for houses facing the linear park, Just as it IS m WaIton Subdivision. He added that the units could have enclosed garages, but It'S not reqUIred by code. He also noted that parking is not allowed along the alley. Commissioner Kirchhoff highlighted thc Planning Board commcnts dunng its review, notmg that there was discussion ahout the linear park, and mdIcated the deslfe is to not disturb the sewer under the linear park. He then stated the Planning Board supports eliminating the two lots adjacent to the park. He then stated the Planning Board was concerned that there was not much detail in the planning of the lots in the suhdivision, particularly those closer to West Oak Street. Commissioner Rupp noted concern about the lots adjacent to the park. He acknowledged that, to provide street connectivity, some of the parkland will be lost. He concluded by stating that he likes the design of this proposed subdivision. Mayor Krauss noted that a variance is required for the less than 100 percent road bordering around parkland Assistant Director Saunders stated that If Huckleberry DrIve IS extended, then the parkland is reduced, and the only options are cash-in-lieu or finding parkland elsewhere m the community. He noted that Condition Nos. 6 throughlO pertain to Huckleberry Drive not extending through the subdiVIsion and, if it is to be extended, those conditions WIll need to be eliminated. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked about the possibility of adding a condItion requiring Huckleberry Dri ve to be moved to the south and connected to the road that continues to the west. The applicant responded that the road to the west is, in fact, a private driveway; and the Engineering Department did not want Huckleberry Drive so near to a private driveway. Commissioner Kirchhoff stated he wants to see Huckleberry Drive extended and the park surrounded by streets on all four sides. He then indicated he has no problem with the parkland dedication requirement being partially met through a cash-in-lieu payment. Commissioner Rupp noted that he's doesn't think the park has to be accessed by roads on all four sides, and he's willing to accept the streets as proposed. It was moved by CommIssioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, that the preliminary plat for Oak Meadows Subdivision, as requested by Allied EngineerIng Services, Inc., for BAM PropeIties, under Application No. P-05074, to subdivide 20 acres described as Tract A, Certificate of Survey No. 2439, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code, which are applicable to this project. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions or code provisions that are not specifically listed does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 2. Buildings proposed for construction with crawl spaces or basements shall include engineer certification regarding depth of groundwater and soil conditions and proposed mitigation methods to be submitted with each building permit. The final plat shall mclude a notation that, due to high groundwater conditions, full or partial basements are not recommended. 02-21-06 - 24- 3. Ca~h-in-lieu of water rights, as calculated by the Director of Public Service, is due with the final plat. 4. The landscaping reqUIred wIthin the 50 foot Class I Entryway Corridor, as outlined in the Design Objectives Plan, shall be Installed by the subdivider prior to final plat or financially guaranteed. 5. The stormwatcr detention/retention facilities shall be designed to occupy less than 1/3 of the 50 foot Class I Entryway Corridor setback and in an organic form designed a~ a landscape feature. (J. A 20 foot wide ~ith 12-f{)ot-w;de p<lvcd C:tll-wc<lthCl dCCC,Ii;~ lOad will bc ICqUilGd along, llK 5(,(ltl. 5idc of Loto; 1 7, Dlock J (tJ.c loto; f1(,llting 011 the p<dk). 7. TJ.c loti> flout;ug 011 tlK palh. 5112111 plov;de a 6;dewalk connection fWlu the plilual' chttdlIce to the 20 foot wide all-weather <lCCOi!'; lOad. 8. rence!'; ;u6talkd 011 the 10t5 flOlit;llg 011 the palk 5hall be leMl;UGC! to a lllaXilJ1tl1u llcight of 4 kGt. 9. Tile lot... floMing on the palk 511all be adequately ,<,lgned and addlG~!';cd a~ dcem.Gd <lpPluflliate by tIlC City of DozenlalI rilC Depaltlucllt, ElIgilIGGlillg DGpaltment and rl<lnnillg DepaltnlGIIt. 10. The lolkd nub ploviding, ellKlgGllcy <1((G55 to thG 10t5 flOnting on the park ~h<tll be painted applopri<\tdy to ploh;b;t palLug, aud "No rdih.;ng DOlcrgcncy Aeee"'~ OlIlf' ~ign!'; .';11all be ;ll6talkd at ea(h (tld of the all-9veathel dGee,<,6 load. 11. All right of way and parking lot area shall be deducted from the total parkland dedication. These areas shall not be dedicated on the final plat. 12. The Homeowners AssocIation shall be responsible for maintenance of the park, park fixtures, trails, etc., until such time that a Park Maintenance District or similar form of funding is established. 13. That the applicant execute at the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder's Office a waiver of right to protest creation of a SID for a City-wide Park Maintenance District, which would provide a mechanism for the fair and equitable assessment of maintenance costs for City parks as part of the final plat submittal. 14. A plat note shall indicate that any future non-residential development on Lot 1, Block 4, or Lot 1, Block 5, will require PUD review and approval. 15. Light fixtures adjacent to fire hydrants shall be installed with a minimum 5 foot separation. 16. This ~ubdivision is in the payback district for the water main and sewer main in North 14th Avenue and for the cast portion of the North 14th Avenue street improvements. Payment of the payback is due prior to final plat approval. 17. Engineering staff does not support the requested deviation to initially allow full access for Lilac A venue and in the future to restrict it to partial access. Instead, Lilac Avenue is to be limited to a partial access with a traffic control island to restrict access to right in - right out only. 18. A detailed Traffic Impact Study for the Oak Meadows Subdivision has been provided to and reviewed by the City Engineer's office. Additional information is needed prior 02-21-06 - 25- to approval of the improvements. The Traffic Impact Study shall also provide recommendations for mitigation of the levels of ~ervice le~s than D at the intersections ofWef,t Oak Street and North 19th Avenue and West Oak Street and North 7th A venue. 19. No direct access from single family or duplex lots to We~t Oak Street will be approved. 20. If not provided already for the entire subdivision, the applicant shall provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protef,t Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID's) for the following: a. Street Improvements to West Oak Street; including hut not limited to paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage improvements. b. Signalization of the intersection of West Oak Street and North 19th Avenue. c. Signalization of the intersection of West Oak Street and North 15th Avenue. d. Signalization of the intersection of Wef,t Oak Street and North 14th A venue. e. Signalization of the intersection of West Oak Street and North 7th Avenue. The document filed shall specify that in the event an SID i& not utIlIzed for the completion of these improvements, the developer agrees to particIpate III an alternate fi nancing method for the completion of said Improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by &quare footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. 21. Huckleberry Drive shall be extended to the west to connect with North 14th Avenue. The park shall be bordered on all four sides by ~treets. 22. Cash in lieu shall be accepted for parkland. The motion failed by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff and Commi&sioner Jacobson; those voting No being Commissioner Rupp and Mayor Krauss. Commissioner Becker abstained. Mayor Krauss postponed the decision for one week to give Commissioner Becker an opportunity to take the steps necessary to vote on this agenda item. Conditional Use Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the re-use of an existing structure as a commercial kitchen - Community Food Co-oP. 711 West Main Street (Z-05294) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness requested by the Community Food Co-op under Application No. Z-05294, to allow fe-use of the structure on Lots 12 through 23, Block 1, Springbrook Addition, as a commercial kitchen. The subject property is located at 711 West Main Street. Public hearing Mayor Krauss opened the public hearing. 02-21-06 - 26 - Commi~sioner Becker, CommissIOner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Krauss noted conflIct of interests that has been previously disclosed. CommIssioner Jacobson noted a contlict of interest that has not been disclosed, so ~he wIll not partIcipate in discussion or voting. Planner Martm Knight presented the staff report. He noted the applicant wants to re-use a 2,400 square foot stmcture a~ a commercial kitchen. No deviations havc been requested, and no parking or land~caping modifications are proposed. He indicated the applicants want to removc a portion ofthe existing windows and walls to accommodate glass doors, but they propose no changes to the ~ignage or awnings. The Planner stated that staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria, and staff's comprehensive findings are contained in the written staff report. Based on those findings, staff has forwarded a recommendation for approval, subject to four condItions. Kelly Wiseman, Community Food Co-op, stated that he just wants to hake cookies and make sandwiche~. No puhlic comment was received in opposition to this application. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Krauss closed the public hearing. Decision It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Becker, that the Conditional Use Permit with Certificate of Appropriateness requested by the Community Food Co-op under Application No. Z-05294, to allow re-use of the stmcture on Lots 12 through 23, Block 1, Springbrook Addition, as a commercial kitchen, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. Details of doors to he installed on the west entrance shall he submitted for review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff prior to final site plan approval. 2. No retail services shall bc permitted as part of this application. Details as to the hours of operation, number of employees, and delivery vehicles to be utilized shall be suhmitted for review and approval by the plannmg office, prior to final site plan approval. 3. The proposed project shall be completed as approved and conditioned in the Conditional Use Permit with a Certificate of Appropriateness application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved application materials shall invalidate the project's legitimacy, unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and approval by the Department of Planning prior to undertaking said modifications. 4. All required permits shall he obtained, approved, and filed with the City of Bozeman Building Department prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, CommiSSIOner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. Commissioner Jacobson abstained. Continued discussion - Preliminary plat for Diamond Estates Subdivision No.2. Phases II and III _ subdivide 82.19 acres located east of }'landers Mill Road and south of West Oak Street extended into 182 residential lots - Gaston Eneineerine and Survevine for Douelas Smith (P-05071) Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell gave a quick overview, noting that Senior Planner Skelton is ill, and Project Engineer Bob Murray has briefly looked at the revised preliminary plat. She forwarded staff's request that action on this item be delayed for one week, to give staff an opportunity to review the new plat 02-21-06 - 27- more clo&ely. She noted that City Attorney Luwe was concerned about the 2-2 tie vote at next week's meeting; however, Mr. Foreman has indicated he will provide a letter of extension If a tie does occur at that meeting. Decision It wa& moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by COmmiS&lOner Jacobson, that the public hearing he continued until next week, per staff's request. The motion carried hy the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacohson, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, and Mayor Kraus&; those voting No, none. Discussion - FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1) Notice that the County Commission meeting for Wednesday, Fehruary 22, has heen cancelled. (2) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, February 22, at the Professional Building. (3) Agenda for the Design Review Board meeting to he held at 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, Fehruary 22, at the Professional Building. (4) Agenda for the City Plannmg Board meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 22, in the Commission Room, along with notice that there is no Zoning Commission meeting scheduled. (5) The City Manager noted that there will be a staffretreat from May 31 to June 2, in Whitefish, Montana. The Commissioners will be meeting WIth the Commissioners and staff of Whitefish on the 1st and 2nd of June. Adiournment - 11:40 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by COmmi&&lOner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the followmg Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Jacobson, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Rupp, and Mayor Krauss; those voting No, none. ATTEST: JEF~t~.J~ ~L~ City Clerk PREPARED BY: D211f: Deputy City Clerk 02M21 M06