Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-08-02 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA August 2, 2004 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, on Monday, August 2,2004, at 7:00 pm. Present were Mayor Andrew Cetraro, Commissioner Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Marcia Youngman, Commissioner Steve Kirchhoff, Commissioner Lee Hietala, Acting City Manager Ron Brey, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell, Planning Director Andy Epple, Acting City Attorney Tim Cooper, and Deputy Clerk of the Commission Karen DeLathower. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. Minutes - April 26. May 3. May 17. May 24. June 7. June 11 Kukulski. and July 26. 2004 It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the minutes of the meetings of June 11 Kukulski interview and July 26.2004 be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Mayor Cetraro deferred action on the minutes of the meetings of April 26, May 3, May 17, May 24 and June 7,2004 to a later date. Consent Items Acting City Manager Brey presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Ordinance No. 1618 - establishina initial municipal zonina desianation of "R-3". Residential-Medium-density. on 0.8206 acres Iyina alona the north side of Durston Road at North 15th Avenue: finally adopt ORDINANCE NO. 1618 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONE MAP AND ESTABLISHING AN INITIAL MUNICIPAL ZONING DESIGNATION OF "R-3" (RESIDENTIAl- MEDIUM-DENSITY DISTRICT) ON 0.8206 ACRES LOCATED IN THE SW 1J.a OF SECTION 1, T2S, R5E, PMM, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. Ordinance No. 1619 - providing for adoption of the current edition of the Uniform Fire Code by administrative order: provisionally adopt and brina back in two weeks for final adoption ORDINANCE NO. 1619 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE AMENDED BY AMENDING 15.36.010, PROVIDING FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE CURRENT EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND PROVISIONS CONSISTENT WITH THAT CODE; PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION OF FUTURE EDITIONS BY ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER OF THE CITY MANAGER; AND AMENDING THE PENAL TY PROVISION. Commission Resolution No. 3704 - settina fees for waiver of open container provisions in Bozeman Municipal Code 08-02-04 -2- COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3704 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ESTABLISHING AN OPEN CONTAINER WAIVER FEE AND A SCHEDULE OF SERVICE COSTS FOR OPEN CO NT AINER WAIVERS. Acknowledae receipt of staff report - annex 1. 754:!: acres described as Lot 27. Gordon Mandeville State School Section Subdivision (325 Griffin Drive) - Palari Architects for McLendon Investments. LLC (A-04008) Commission Resolution No. 3702 - intent to annex 1.754:!: acres described as Lot 27. Gordon Mandeville State School Section Subdivision (325 Griffin Drive): set public hearina for September 7.2004 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3702 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, DECLARING IT. TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, THE INHABITANTS THEREOF AND THE INHABITANTS OF A TRACT OF LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN, AND HEREIN MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED, TO EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID CONTIGUOUS TRACT WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS THEREOF. Acknowledae receipt of staff report - annex 1.93 acres described as Lots 26 and 27. Beatty's Alder Court Subdivision: Tract 1 described in Document No. 2054756: Tract 2 described in Document No. 2054753: and Tract E described in Film 191. Paae 2361 (aenerally located west of Alder Court Lane. south of West Lincoln Street. and east of Maple Lane) (A-04009) Commission Resolution No. 3703 - intent to annex 1.93 acres described as Lots 26 and 27. Beatty's Alder Court Subdivision: Tract 1 described in Document No. 2054756: Tract 2 described in Document No. 2054753: and Tract E described in Film 191. Paae 2361 (aenerallylocated west of Alder Court Lane. south of West Lincoln Street. and east of Maple Lane): set public hearina for September 7.2004 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3703 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA. DECLARING IT TO BE THE INTENTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, THE INHABIT ANTS THEREOF AND THE INHABITANTS OF TRACTS OF LAND CONTIGUOUS TO SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN, AND HEREIN MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED, TO EXTEND THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID CITY OF BOZEMAN SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID CONTIGUOUS TRACT WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS THEREOF. Approval of final plat for Broadwater Court PUD Subdivision. Phase II (subdivide 1.6899 acres located at the northeast corner of West Babcock Street and Ferauson Avenue into 18 townhouse residential lots) Authorize Actina City Manaaer to sian . Acceptance of Public Street Easement - Dennis Balian and Joni Balian - 20-foot-wide easement across Tract A. COS No. 2389 (along north side of Durston Road. north of Bronken Park) Authorize Actina City Manaaer to sian - Acceptance of Public Street Easement - Dennis Balian and Joni Balian - 60-foot-wide easement across Tract A. COS No. 2389 (for extension of Cottonwood Road north from Durston Road) Authorize Actina City Manaaer to sian - Acceptance of Public Street Easement - Dennis Balian and Joni Balian - 60-foot-wide easement across Tract A. COS No. 2389 (alona north end of parcel) 08-02-04 ----.--- - 3 - Acknowledae receipt of reauest for creation of special improvement liahtina district for Valley West Subdivision. Phase II: refer to staff Commission Resolution No. 3705 - intent to revise the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan bv amendina the land use desianation description for business park contained in Section 6.2.3 COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3705 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, STATING THE CITY'S INTENT TO REVISE THE BOZEMAN 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN BY AMENDING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION DESCRIPTION FOR BUSINESS PARK CONTAINED IN SECTION 6.2.3. Claims It was moved by Commissioner Youngman. seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff. that the Commission approve the Consent Items as listed and authorize and direct the appropriate persons to complete the necessary actions. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala. Commissioner Krauss. and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Public comment No comment was received under this agenda item. Public hearina - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow enclosure of front covered porch and construction of a 2-foot by 6-foot addition at the southeast corner of sinale-household residence located on the west 62% feet of Lot 12 and the west 62% feet of the north 24 feet of Lot 13. Block 2. Park Addition. with deviation from Section 18.16.050. Bozeman Municipal Code. to allow addition to further encroach into 20-foot rear yard setback - Laura Estes. 114 South 7th Avenue (Z-04142) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Laura Estes under Application No. Z-04142, to allow the enclosure of an existing front covered porch and the construction of a 2-foot by 6-foot addition at the southeast corner of single-household residence located on the west 52%. feet of Lot 12 and the west 62%. feet of the north 24 feet of Lot 13. Block 2, Park Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.16.050, Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow the addition to further encroach into the 20-foot rear yard setback. The subject property is located at 114 South 7th Avenue. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor presented the staff report and reviewed the application, noting this property is zoned R-2 and is located in the neighborhood conservation overlay district. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings can be found in the written staff report. No public comment has been received by Planning staff. Laura Estes, applicant, notified the Commission that she will not be enclosing the front porch at this time. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor noted the front porch enclosure did not require a deviation, so the project does not change. No one was present to speak in opposition of this application. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Laura Estes under Application No. Z-04142, to allow the enclosure of an 08-02-04 _n___ -4- existing front covered porch and the construction of a 2-foot by 6-foot addition at the southeast corner of single-household residence located on the west 62'Y2 feet of Lot 12 and the west 62'Y2 feet of the north 24 feet of Lot 13, Block 2, Park Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.16.050, Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow the addition to further encroach into the 20-foot rear yard setback, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall retain the existing square post columns in the new construction of the porch enclosure. 2. The applicant shall provide a color and materials palette for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 3. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required fees prior to construction, and within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void; 4. This project shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of Appropriateness with deviations application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved drawings shall invalidate the project's approval unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and. approval by the Department of Planning prior to undertaking said modifications, as required by Section 18.64.110 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Continued public hearina - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow removal of existina rear concrete slab and construction of new 576-sauare-foot footprint. 20-foot-hiah detached rear aaraae with second-floor accessory dwellina unit on Lots 15 and 16 and one foot of Lot 17. Block 48. Park Addition. with deviations from Section 18.16.040. Bozeman Municipal Code. to allow accessory dwellina unit on a lot 10 feet narrower than the reauired 60-foot width. and from Section 18.16.050. to allow detached rear aaraae to encroach 14 feet into the reauired 20-foot rear yard setback - Rich Noonan for Claud & Jan Matnev (718 South 7th Avenue) (Z-04158) This was the time and place set for the continued public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Rich Noonan for Claud and Jan Matney under Application No. Z-04158, to allow removal of the existing rear concrete slab and construction of a new 576-square-foot footprint, 20-foot- high detached rear garage with second-floor accessory dwelling unit on Lots 15 and 16 and one foot of Lot 17, Block 48, Park Addition, with deviations from Section 18.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow an accessory dwelling unit on a lot 10 feet narrower than the required 60-foot width, and from Section 18.16.050, to allow the detached rear garage to encroach 14 feet into the required 20-foot rear yard setback. The subject property is located at 718 South 7th Avenue. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Distributed just prior to the meeting was an e-mail message from John Paxton, 721 South 6th Avenue, supporting the construction of a two-car garage with an adequate setback, but not supporting the requested accessory dwelling unit. Distributed during the meeting was a letter in opposition to this project from Mary Frost, 716 South 6th Avenue. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor presented the staff report and reviewed this application, noting this property is zoned R-2 and is located in the Cooper Park Historic District and the neighborhood conservation overlay district. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings can be found in the written staff report. As proposed, the new construction is over the allotted 25 percent of rear lot coverage for a detachd structure. Therefore, staff is requiring the removal of the 54-square-foot deck, while allowing the exterior staircase to remain. Staff also strongly recommends the applicant decrease the building footprint to approximately 500 square feet. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor noted the alley is not 20 feet in width, as depicted on submittal materials, rather it is 14 feet. Therefore, staff is requiring the driveway to be increased to 12 feet to allow proper maneuvering and to make it more compatible with the existing rear yard setbacks along the alley. Staff has also determined that one parking space along side of the garage is 08-02-04 .-.-....--.--."..-... . . n_.__ .____._. ._n ._ .._______n____..._._n__ - 5 - required for the accessory dwelling unit. The basement apartment kitchen shall be removed prior to construction of the accessory dwelling unit, which staff believes will reduce the density on this site from eight individuals to six. Several letters of opposition have been received by the Planning Department, with the predominate concerns being the rear yard setback and the addition of an accessory dwelling unit on this site. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked if there is a criterion established to determine what is an appropriate density in an R-2 neighborhood. Planning Director Epple stated the closest thing is the standard of eight to twelve dwelling units per acre allowed in a medium density residential area. Commissioner Kirchhoff then noted that the Unified Development Ordinance requires one of the structures to be occupied by someone with 50 percent principal interest in the property and asked if that pertains only to R-1 zones. Planning Director Epple answered it does; R-2 districts do not have that limitation. Rich Noonan, applicant, stated this is a simple transformation from a non-conforming two-family residence to a conforming single-family residence with an accessory dwelling unit. The density will be reduced, which will benefit the community and the neighborhood. He and the owners have issues with condition numbers two and five. They request the drive access from the rear property line be reduced to six feet, as they originally requested. There are a lot of encroachments into the alley from the east and west, which gives the appearance of this alley being narrower than 20 feet. They also want condition number 5, which does not allow the second-floor exterior deck, to be eliminated. The deck/porch is an open area used to get down to the ground, and the area below it could be planted as a rock garden or with growing plants. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked if condition number two does not change, what would the distance be between the house and the new structure. Mr. Noonan replied he believes it would be somewhere between eight and ten feet. Mary Frost, 716 South 6 Avenue, stated she is opposed to this proposal because of the number of accessory dwelling units which keep appearing in this neighborhood. Some of them are used as office space, studio space, or living quarters for family members; however, any of them could be turned into rental property. Allowing alley accessory dwelling units is opening the door for tri-plexes. She lives next door to a duplex; and City codes are not enforced now, nor is the duplex'monitored as to number of residents. Ms. Frost went on to say that this alley is narrow and congested, this is a neighborhood of very small lots, street parking is already difficult, and the neighboring back yard is turning into a parking lot. There is simply no more room for additional cars in this neighborhood. Fifteen years ago when she purchased her home, this was a quiet neighborhood of single-family homes. Now duplexes have been created, owned by out-of-state landlords; and they are decreasing the property values. character, and desirability of the south side. These alley units are changing the landscape of the area, and they do not fit with the historical character of this neighborhood. Lowell Springer, 117 Hoffman Street, said he understands what the Matneys are trying to do; and he suggested the Commission take another look at condition number five because the stairs come up to a landing anyway, so it might as well be useable and functional. Anything that reduces a non-conformity is typically looked at favorably, and this proposal will result in the reduction in the number of people on this site. Julie Shea, 715 South 6 Avenue, reminded the Commissioners this property is located within the Cooper Park Historic District, and this application is not consistent with its historic designation. These lots and homes are not the size required for today's R-2 zoning designation; they are much too small, which is why the code requires a minimum 60-foot lot. If this application is approved, it will diminish the quaintness of small houses and garages in this historic district. Ms. Shea noted neighbors' privacy will be compromised by allowing this accessory dwelling unit. She closed by noting the southside neighborhood is a model for new development within the city, and too much infill of structures will ruin the very neighborhood values that others are trying to duplicate. Kris Thomas, 719 South 6 Avenue, said she wanted to address quality of life considerations and why the neighbors are worried. Enforcement of City codes is challenging at best, and there is a reason a 60-foot lot minimum is required for accessory dwelling units. This structure will affect neighborhood privacy, noise, and other quality of life issues. Ms. Thomas requested a 20-foot setback to create a comfortable buffer for 08-02-04 -.- - ..-....-...- -...--------.-.- -6- the neighbors' privacy, since the east window will look directly into their yard and the neighbors' yard. There are already serious safety concerns regarding alley congestion; an 8-year-old was hit by a car in the alley this year; neighboring school-aged children are not allowed in the alley because of the traffic congestion and speed; her van was struck by a renter's speeding vehicle in the alley, and the alley is consistently blocked by renters' vehicles. The Matney property has a history of complaints related to noise, upkeep, garbage issues, and vehicles encroaching into the alley. The noise from a second story dwelling unit will have a much greater impact on the neighbors than the current basement apartment. Declining property values, reduced sunlight, and the number of unrelated persons dwelling together are also neighborhood concerns. Ms. Thomas closed by asking if there are no clear guidelines established for granting these deviations, why would staff deviate from the well-thought-out codes of development; and if deviations are flexible, then the code should include provisions for neighborhood concerns. Bob Ekey, 719 South 6 Avenue, stated he is hopeful the City is flexible enough that neighborhood concerns can playa role in its decision making. He asked the Commission to deny the deviations because of quality of life issues and the decline of property values. Density decisions must be balanced with keeping neighborhoods liveable. While it has been said this accessory dwelling unit will reduce density, it will result in increased density. There are four bedrooms in the principal unit, with a one-bedroom apartment in the basement, and now another bedroom is proposed. Occupancy will fill out the space that is there; and in all likelihood, there will more than four people occupying the principal dwelling. Enforcement now is very difficult; and by granting this, the Commission will be creating an enforcement nightmare. Enforcement by complaint creates a contentious situation for neighborhoods. Mr. Ekey pointed out this alley serves 14 homes, seven with basement apartments, plus one garage apartment, for a total of 22 dwelling units on 2.4 acres, which makes this block at full occupancy. If the block had minimum 60-foot wide lots, there would be 10 lots instead of the current 14, which is why they believe the code was written to require a 60-foot lot width. Mr. Ekey agreed there seems to be a lack of clear criterion as to why deviations are granted or denied, and he believes this project crosses the line of what is acceptable to say "no" to. The intent of accessory dwelling units is being exceeded by this project to maximize the density of this property. Will Swearingen, 502 South 6 Avenue, stated he is concerned about the historical character and integrity of the Cooper Park Historic District. The City is being asked to grant two deviations to existing regulations, and he feels this project should serve the City's goals and create no harm. While from a planning perspective, it could be said this project contributes to the goals of infill and affordable housing; this project is going to add additional renters to the neighborhood and will probably increase the number of occupants from eight to ten because the basement will still be available for rent, even without the kitchen. This area is full of illegal basement apartments, and this kind of project erodes the character and integrity of the neighborhood. There is too much traffic and excessive density on this block and in this historic district. Mr. Swearingen said he believes the City should promote single family, owner occupied dwellings in this historic district. A garage apartment, flush with the alley, and 20 feet high will tower over the neighbors and will affect their privacy and afternoon sunshine. Mr. Swearingen closed by saying he doesn't understand how the City can approve a project for one absentee landlord at the expense of the neighbors. Steve Shea, 715 South 6 Avenue, noted they have spent a lot of time on preparation for this meeting; and one of their issues is that they, too, are part of the city. The City is heading down a slippery slope with respect to deviations and project approval consistency because objective criteria is lacking. He asked if the City could offer them examples that enter into decision making processes that show objectivity, or an accessory dwelling unit in an historic district that does not require deviations. Potentially there could be 28 accessory dwelling units on this block, with the 14 homes. These projects are judged on subjective criteria, which isn't fair to the neighbors and neighborhoods. They want the neighborhood to remain as it was when they bought their home; small homes on small lots. They desire to live in this neighborhood peacefully and not come to Commission meetings other than to be proactive. Rick Kerin, 609 South 6 Avenue, stated he has seen this neighborhood erode into rentals over the years he has lived there. This is the tip of the iceberg that is eroding their neighborhood and the neighborhood schools. Despite assertions to the contrary, this will be a tri-plex; and the net gain will be to add another living unit with an out-of-state landlord. The City needs to be sensitive to this because it affects the neighborhood, which is currently impacted by rentals. He pointed to the New York lawyer who bought a neighboring house for his son to live in while he is in school, and that kid has turned it into a fraternity house, with no house parents, and numerous visits by the police as one example. That lawyer told Mary Frost he wasn't doing well in the stock market so this is an investment for him; and many more will follow suit as stock prices continue to decline. 08-02-04 - ----------------- - 7 - Mr. Noonan thanked the neighbors for coming out, aCknowledging it is hard to watch things change in a neighborhood; and it is hard for the Commission to make these decisions. He pointed out there is a system for granting deviations set up, as long as the projects meet the criteria. He feels they should be granted both a 6-foot rear yard setback and the porch/deck so it will be usable space, rather than an entryway that does nothing. There will be a density of 22 units on two acres, which is 11 units per acre; and this is desirable density. The principal dwelling only contains three bedrooms, not the four mentioned earlier. Allowable lot coverage for an accessory dwelling unit is 25 percent, which they have just squeaked over if the deck is counted as part of the unit. In response to an earlier question, Historic Preservation Planner Bristor stated the distance between the accessory dwelling unit and the existing house will be eight feet. By code, there is 40 percent lot coverage allowed, which is met; but the accessory dwelling unit is not below the required 25 percent rear lot coverage with the deck. The 12 foot of driveway access will not be a parking pad, and staff did not count that in the parking space calculation. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted that R-2 zoning allows duplexes and asked if there could be a duplex and an accessory dwelling unit on one lot. Planning Director Epple responded it would depend upon the lot size, noting 6,000 square feet is the minimum size for a duplex; and an accessory dwelling unit, in addition to the duplex, would require a 7,000 square foot lot. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted this block is near 12 units per acre now; and if four more accessory dwelling units were built on this block, it would exceed the number of allowable units per acre in an R-2 zoned area. That is the central question of this application; this neighborhood is getting near the edge of the density allotment for this block. He suggested the Commission needs to have further discussions to determine if R-1 restrictions on accessory dwelling units would also benefit R-2 districts. Commissioner Youngman asked for clarification as to why it is different to have an accessory dwelling unit in an R-2 area than it is in an R-1 area. Planning Director Epple replied the idea of accessory dwelling units was to allow more flexibility for single household neighborhoods, but it was not intended to consider single household neighborhoods in the same light as multi-plex neighborhoods. Single household neighborhoods have a higher standard required, that of owner occupancy. In adding a provision to allow accessory dwelling units in multi-plex neighborhoods, it seemed that in a district with duplexes that have both units rented out without owner occupancy required, it would be consistent for an accessory dwelling unit to not be occupied by the owner. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Planning Director Epple pointed out that in an R-2 district, if someone wants to develop a second unit on the property as detached, it would require a 10,000 square foot lot for two units. An accessory dwelling unit should be allowed on the same size lot as a duplex would be allowed, which is 6,000 square feet. Commissioner Youngman recognized it is a reality that enforcement problems are left up to the neighbors to complain and asked if there is any way, in a neighborhood concerned about enforcement, that a condition could be added to deal with potential enforcement problems such as trash or excessive number of occupants in a unit. Acting City Attorney Cooper stated there is a standard condition included in a conditional use permit approval that continued compliance with code requirements is necessary to retain the permit, but that doesn't exist under a certificate of appropriateness. There is no basis at this time to tell the Commission that it cannot impose a condition of that nature on an accessory dwelling unit, although certificates of appropriateness primarily address mass and scale. If the Commission desires a higher level of certainty, he will need to research it further; but he is not uncomfortable with a condition of that nature at this time. Density seems to be a big question with this application; how to maintain the lower density by keeping the illegal apartment unoccupied. Planning Director Epple added that when the Commission is dealing with a request for deviations, it has broad authority to add conditions to mitigate impacts. Commissioner Hietala asked if the Commission were to impose such a set of questions, is there a section of code that pertains to compliance with other requirements. Commissioner Youngman answered noise, trash, and number of tenants are all code related, but traffic is not. Commissioner Youngman inquired if maximum desirable density within a neighborhood could be used as grounds to deny future applications for higher density in a neighborhood that is at maximum desirable density. Planning Director Epple answered every proposal must be examined on its own merit within the framework of the code. If a project requires deviations, it automatically triggers a higher level of review; and it is a discretionary action on the part of the Commission to approve it. If this lot had been wider 08-02-04 ---------- -- - -- - - ---- - -8- and could have met the setbacks, this application would have been reviewed by Administrative Design Review staff. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. Planning Director Epple stated the accepted definition of "structure" is anything having location on the ground, so staff is interpreting that the attached porch/deck is part of the structure. If the deck is to be retained, it would require a third deviation. The Planning Director suggested the Commission should give the applicants the opportunity to reduce the size of the overall structure to 22 feet by 24 feet and keep the deck, or retain the current footprint and remove the deck. Commissioner Youngman offered that a condition of approval should be added that if violations occur, the certificate of appropriateness will become void. Nuisances, noise, and exceeding the maximum number of tenants violations would violate the certificate of appropriateness. Acting City Manager Brey noted staff will have to line out how those kinds of violations should be addressed and said he would prefer to hear what Commission preference is and then allow staff a week to research that to come up with consequences. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted he has voted to approve accessory dwelling units in all circumstances, but the things that give him real pause here is the public input and the fact that neither structure will be owner occupied. Because this neighborhood is located two blocks from Montana State University, it allows greater opportunity for rental properties. Commissioner Youngman said she is looking for a way to make sure behaviors are consistent with the code and the neighborhood. She suggested having a periodic review; and if there are unresolved complaints from the neighbors, the accessory dwelling unit could be revoked. That would provide motivation for property owners to make certain occupants comply with all codes. Commissioner Krauss stated he did not want to postpone the vote on this proposal for a week because of the number of neighbors present. He said he believes this application will be approved, and the handwriting is on the wall for all these neighborhoods. This is creating duplex or tri-plex units in neighborhoods that can't support them. Commissioner Krauss expressed a concern for public safety with granting primary access to a dwelling unit off of a 20 foot or less alley, which creates real problems for fire and ambulance crews. He believes the City is going to extraordinary measures to approve an application that is not in compliance, and zoning is being slowly eroded. He has previously voted against additional density in areas that are already congested, with no way to relieve the pressure on urban blocks; and he will vote no on this one. Additionally, he cannot find this application is compatible with the neighborhood. Commissioner Youngman pointed out this is not increasing the density from what is already there, if there is compliance with the codes. This is a different configuration of a duplex, which is different from the accessory dwelling unit issues that have been dealt with in the past. She does, however, remain concerned about the basement bedroom and the occupancy level of the main house. Commissioner Krauss noted the number one complaint of neighborhoods is absentee landlords and proving the number of occupants. He reiterated this is inappropriate density for an area that the city values, although he would be agreeable to a garage only. Acting City Manager Brey stated his concern with staff researching consequences is that what will be recommended will not be a panacea, and it will be directed to neighborhood concerns. He is also concerned with staff's ability to take on another additional enforcement burden that is tied to the continued use of this property. He urged the Commission to consider this application on its merits because what staff is able to come up with might not be readily enforceable. Commissioner Youngman said she is struggling because this lot is large enough to support an accessory dwelling unit, but it is too narrow. The narrowness of the lot doesn't affect the neighbors across the alley, who are the biggest objectors. The Commission needs to determine if the positives outweigh the negatives for this application, as well as the fact that no change of density is being proposed. Acting City Attorney Cooper noted that the accessory dwelling unit applications that have come before the Commission were all conditional use applications. This one is not a conditional use, it is a permitted use; and if this application did not require deviations, it would not have come before the 08-02-04 -.---.-..---.-..........-." ..- -9- Commission. The Commission needs to decide whether or not it can grant the requested deviations, because it is already a permitted use which can't be changed unless the zone code is changed. They can be required to meet all code requirements in place at this time before the Planning Director signs off on the certificate of appropriateness. Once the unit is built, if there are actions on the part of the occupants, the Code Enforcement Officer would have to respond. Commissioner Kirchhoff said he cannot find this project will have adverse effects on the quality of life of the neighbors or will present safety risks. He does not agree that this neighborhood is not built to sustain this level of density. Commissioner Youngman stated she is struggling with the code enforcement idea because there should be a better way than neighborhood complaints to ensure this property conforms with all codes. The Commission needs to be accountable to ensure situations in neighborhoods remain as positive as possible. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Rich Noonan for Claud and Jan Matney under Application No. Z-04158, to allow removal of the existing rear concrete slab and construction of a new 576-square-foot footprint, 20-foot- high detached rear garage with second-floor accessory dwelling unit on Lots 15 and 16 and one foot of Lot 17, Block 48, Park Addition, with deviations from Section 18.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow an accessory dwelling unit on a lot 10 feet narrower than the required 60-foot width, and from Section 18.16.050, to allow the detached rear garage to encroach 14 feet into the required 20-foot rear yard setback, by approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall schedule a building inspection with the Bozeman Code Enforcement Officer, Vicki Hasler, to confirm the removal of the basement kitchen unit prior to construction. Ms. Hasler may be reached by phone at 406-582-2260. 2. The new construction shall provide 12 feet of drive access from the rear property line. A modified site plan shall be submitted by the applicant for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 3. The existing, rear concrete slab shall be removed and the new construction shall provide one off-street parking space, 9 feet by 20 feet in dimensions, alongside the proposed south elevation. A modified site plan shall be submitted by the applicant for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 4. The new construction shall incorporate overhanging eaves in the proposed roof design. 5. The structural footprint of the new construction shall decrease to ~ 600 square feet, by either excluding the 2nd floor exterior deck or decreasing the building footprint dimensions. A modified site plan shall be submitted by the applicant for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review staff. 6. The applicant shall provide further information pertaining to the window design of the new construction for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review Staff. 7. The applicant shall provide a color and materials palette for final design review and approval by Administrative Design Review staff. 8. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required fees prior to construction, and within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void. 9. This project shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of Appropriateness with deviations application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved drawings shall invalidate the project's approval unless the applicant submits the proposed modifications for review and approval by the Department of Planning prior to undertaking said modifications, as required by Section 18.64.110 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. 08-02-04 ..__._._... .._..n___ - 10 - The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, Commissioner Krauss. Break 8:37- 8:43 pm Mayor Cetraro declared a break from 8:37 pm until 8:43 pm in accordance with Commission policy. Public hearina - Growth Policy Amendment - Delaney and Company - amend the description of the Business Park land use desianation to revise the types of uses allowed within business Darks (P-04027) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Growth Policy Amendment requested by Delaney and Company under Application No. P-04027. to amend the description of the Business Park land use designation to revise the types of uses allowed within business parks. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Planning Director Epple presented the staff report on behalf of Associate Planner Sanford. He noted that under this application, the description of the Business Park land use designation is to be revised as follows: Business Park. This classification provides for areas typified by office uses al1d technology oriented light industrial uses, althougn retail, 8ervices, or industrial U8e8 may also be included as an acces~mry or local 8el'\.ice role, industrial uses and warehousina. Anv use. except casinos and retail. larae scale, may be allowed as part of an approved planned unit development subiect to the provisions of Chapter 18.36. BMC. Business parks are encouraged to be an intearation of a variety of uses beneficial to all park users. further enhancina the aoals and obiectives of this plan. The Planning Director reviewed the applicants' proposed amendment, noting staff felt the language crafted by the applicant went farther than staff could support. The City Plannrng Board came up with an alternative description of the Business Park land use classification as set out in the staff report. Michael Delaney, Delaney & Company, thanked staff for its guidance in trying to craft language for flexibility in the business park zoning. Commission approval this evening will not be an endorsement of any future planned unit development on his property, hospital property, or Montana State University property. This is the only method by which people who own those properties have the ability to do something other than the narrow interpretation of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Every business park in America has a great hotel convention center included in the park, but today a hotel convention center would not be an allowable accessory use. Lowell Springer, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Advanced Technology Park, stated they believe this language will allow them to do things that would support the activities of the park, which the previous language would not. He asked that the Commission vote favorably for this language change. No one was present to speak in opposition to this amendment. Mayor Cetraro asked if hotel conference center use would be allowable under this revised language. Planning Director Epple responded the proposal would need to be evaluated to determine if its use is compatible with, and in support of, the underlying business intent. Commissioner Krauss noted the Planning Board discussed that the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan doesn't allow for changes in underlying uses. Planning Director Epple clarified that the real issue was that the land use classifications in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan were so tightly worded that the planned unit development process was handcuffed. This proposed language opens that up and allows flexibility. He doesn't believe that those using the planned unit development process under the Unified Development Ordinance will find it to be that difficult. Planning Director Epple pointed out this proposed language doesn't convert the business park district into a regional commercial district, which is important. 08-02-04 ...- ,...-..".-. - 11 - Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Growth Policy Amendment requested by Delaney and Company under Application No. P-04027, to amend the description of the Business Park land use designation to revise the types of uses allowed within business parks, be approved by revising the section to read as follows: Business Park. This classification provides for areas typified by office and light industrial uses. I!Iltllough I etl!lil, sel vices, or industril!ll uses FMY also be included I!IS !III !lc..eessol y or 10eBI service role. Additional uses such as retail. services. or industrial. may be approved if they are compatible with, and in suPPort of. the underlvina Business Park intent. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Commissioner Hietala; those voting No, Mayor Cetraro. Public hearina - modifications to Dreliminarv Dlat for Vallev West Planned Unit DeveloDment Subdivision. Phase 11- Morrison-Maierle.lnc.. and Pruah & Lenon Architects for Bozeman Lakes. LLC - allow 28.63 acres to be subdivided into 64 residential lots. 40Den SDace lots and 1 Dublic Dark. with relaxations from various sections ofthe subdivision reaulations laenerallv located west of Ferauson Avenue. east of Stafford Avenue. and north of Alexander Street and Monroe Street) lP-03036A) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on modifications to the preliminary plat for Valley West Planned Unit Development Subdivision, Phase II, as requested by Morrison-Maierle, Inc., and Prugh and Lenon Architects for Bozeman Lakes, LLC, under Application No. P-03036A, to allow 28.63 acres to be subdivided into 64 residential lots, 4 open space lots and 1 public park, with the fOllowing relaxations from the subdivision regulations: (1) from Section 16.14.030.0.1., to allow homes on corner lots to have different orientation than lots on the interior; (2) from Section 16.14.030.F., to allow lots to have average depths greater than three times average widths; (3) from Section 16.14.030. H., to allow lots to have frontage on common open space instead of public street or public street easement; (4) from Section 16.14.040.B., to allow block length to be greater than 400 feet; (5) from Section 16.14.040.C., to allow block width to be greater than 400 feet; and (6) from Section 16.14.040.D., to allow continuous length of block to exceed 400 feet without intersection or pedestrian walk. The subject property is generally located west of Ferguson Avenue, east of Stafford Avenue, and north of Alexander Street and Monroe Street. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Planning Director Epple presented the staff report on behalf of Assistant Planner Kozub, noting that Phase II was approved last year for 51 residential lots. This proposal does not change the street configuration or park layout, rather it is a proposal to change what had been lots 39, 40, and 41 from large multi-plex lots to individual townhouse lots. Lots 44, 46, 49, and 50, which were originally multiple household structures lots, are now being reconfigured into two multiple household lots. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings can be found in the written staff report. No public comment was received in support of, or opposition to, this application. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the modifications to the preliminary plat for Valley West Planned Unit Development Subdivision, Phase II, as requested by Morrison-Maierle, Inc., and Prugh and Lenon Architects for Bozeman Lakes, LLC, under Application No. P-03036A, to allow 28.63 acres to be subdivided into 64 residential lots, 4 open space lots and 1 public park, with the following relaxations from the subdivision regulations: (1 ) from Section 16.14.030.0.1., to allow homes on corner lots to have different orientation than lots on the interior; (2) from Section 16.14.030.F., to allow lots to have average depths greater than three times average widths; (3) from Section 16.14.030.H., to allow lots to have frontage on common open space instead of public street or public street easement; (4) from Section 16.14.040.8., to allow block length to be greater than 400 feet; (5) from Section 16.14.040.C., to allow block width to be greater than 400 feet; and (6) from Section 16.14.040.0., to 08-02-04 - 12 - allow continuous length of block to exceed 400 feet without intersection or pedestrian walk, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat shall indicate acreage for all remaining tracts. 2. Prior to final plat approval, the applicants shall provide additional information including a narrative and a graphic representation to demonstrate that stormwater runoff does not flow directly into the lake. 3. All references to setbacks shall be removed from the final plat. 4. Section 16.14.11 O.A "City of Bozeman Rights-of-Way," states that the subdivider shall be responsible for installing sod, boulevard trees, and an irrigation system in the public right-of-way boulevard strips along all external subdivision streets and adjacent to subdivision parks or other open space areas. 5. The subdivider shall provide irrigation systemas-builts, for all irrigation installed in public rights-of-way and/or land used to meet parkland dedication requirements. The as-builts shall include the exact locations and type of lines, including accurate depth, water source, heads, electric valves. quick couplers, drains and control box as outlined in Section 16.08.090 "Irrigation System As-Builts." 6. The dedicated parkland shall be identified as "Public Park" on the final plat and the common open space access strips and pocket parks shall be overlaid with a public access easement. Provisions within the covenants shall provide for the care and maintenance of these areas, which will ensure usability for the homeowners and general public. 7. The developer shall submit a formal development plan signed by a certified landscape architect for the design of all dedicated parklands within said subdivision for review and approval by the Superintendent of Facilities and Public Lands, and the City of Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. Per Section 16.08.080 "Final Park Plan", a final park plan shall be submitted to the City of Bozeman for review and approval prior to the installation of any park improvements. The park plan shall address all of the items listed in Section 16.08.050.P for the dedicated parkland, open space areas, and trail amenities. The implementation plan for the maintenance and upkeep of the parklands and trails shall be noted accordingly in the protective covenants and restrictions of the property owners' association documents. for review and approval prior to final plat approval. 8. A declaration of the most recent covenants, with the corrections outlined by staff, for Valley West Planned Unit Development must be included and recorded with the final plat for Phase II. The City of Bozeman shall be party to any changes or modifications made to the restrictive covenants and architectural guidelines as they relate to any zoning and/or planning bylaws. 9. Water rights, or cash-in-lieu thereof, shall be provided and paid for prior to final plat approval. If the final plat of the subdivision is filed in phases, water rights will only be required for each phase as the final plat for that phase is filed. The amount of water rights required will be determined by the Director of Public Service based on the proposed final plat(s). 10. Prior to final plat approval, a Memorandum of Understanding shall be entered into by the Weed Control District and the subdivider for the control of county declared noxious weeds and a copy provided to the Planning Department. 11. The final plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required documents, including certification from the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate, and all required and corrected certificates. The final plat application shall 08-02-04 --..-----.---.- - 13 - include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a stable base polyester film ( or equivalent); two (2) digital copies on a double-sided, high density 31h-inch floppy disk or compact disk; and five (5) paper prints. 12. Conditional approval of the preliminary plat shall be in force for not more than three calendar years, as provided by state statute. Prior to that expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of request for the extension of the period to the Planning Director for the City Commission's consideration. 13. If it is the subdivider's intent to file the plat prior to the completion of all required improvements, an Improvements Agreement shall be entered into with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the completion of all improvements in accordance with the preliminary plat submittal information and conditions of approval. If the final plat is filed prior to the installation of all improvements, the developer shall supply the City of Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to 150 percent of the cost of the remaining improvements. 14. Any revisions to the approved stormwater master plan for. the subdivision for a system designed to remove solids, silt, oils, grease, and other pollutants from the runoff from the private and public streets and all lots s hall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. 15. Stormwatergenerated by the proposed subdivision which discharges to any privately owned ditch must have the written permission of the ditch owner. 16. The final plat must account for the ditch and the utility/drainage ditch easement along Ferguson Avenue. 17. Any revisions to the approved design reports evaluating existing capacity of water and sewer utilities for the entire Valley West PUD shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. 18. The location of and distinction between existing and proposed .sewer and water mains and all easements shall be clearly and accurately depicted on the plans and specificationss,as well as all nearby fire hydrants and proposed fire hydrants. 19. Any revisions to the approved plans and specifications for water and sewer main extensions, prepared and signed by a professional engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans shall also be approved by the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant shall also provide professional engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction certification, and preparation of mylar record drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted. No building permits shall be issued prior to City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements. 20. Any easements needed for the water and sewer main extensions' shall be a minimum of 30 feet in width. While the final location of the water and sewer mains will be determined once the final street widths are approved, in no case shall the utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of the easement. All necessary easements shall be provided prior to final plat approval and shall be shown on the plat. Wherever water and/or sewer mains are not located under or accessed from improved streets, a 12-foot wide all weather access drive shall be constructed above the utilities to provide necessary access. 21. Any street rights of way which are within the boundaries of this subdivision and for which easements were provided with the Valley West Annexation Agreement shall be dedicated to the City on the final plat for this subdivision. 08-02-04 . .______. .., ___ __n - 14 - 22. A detailed traffic study report for the entire Valley West Development has been provided to and reviewed by the City Engineer's office. While specific comments regarding the analysis have been provided by the City Engineer to the developer's engineer, City Engineering staff is comfortable that development of Phase II may take place without adversely affecting the local street network. However, considering the degree of development currently occurring along both the West Babcock Street and D urston Road corridors and given that the City is already actively pursuing improvements to both of those roadways, it may be necessary to update the traffic study as part of the preliminary plat submittal for each phase subsequent to Phase II. The need for any traffic impact analysis updates will be identified at the time of pre-application plan submittal for each subsequent phase. 23. Prior to filing the final plat, the applicant shall reconfirm or verify with the County GIS Department, County Road and Bridge Department, and City Engineer that all proposed names are acceptable in order to avoid duplication of names countywide. which may occur between preliminary approval of subdivision phase and filing of final plat. 24. The final plat shall contain a note prohibiting direct access from single family or duplex lots to Ferguson Avenue. 25. City standard curb, gutter and sidewalk shall be provided along all streets in the subdivision. Per Chapter 16.14.050 of the subdivision regulations, sidewalks will be installed prior to occupancy of any individual lots. 26. The applicant is advised that the installation of any traffic calming devices such as curb bulbs and traffic circles will be considered in detail and approved if appropriate during the infrastructure plan and specification review process. 27. All typical street sections, including sidewalk location within the right-of-way and provisions for bicyclists shall be in conformance with the street standards recommended in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2001 Update, unless otherwise approved by the City Commission, or by the City Engineer, through the plan and specification review and approval process. 28. Any revisions to the approved plans and specifications for streets and storm drainage facilities, prepared and signed by a professional engineer (PE) registered in the State of Montana shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall also provide professional engineering services for construction inspection, post-construction certification, and preparation of mylar record drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been approved and a preconstruction conference has been conducted. No building permits shall be issued prior to City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements. 29. The location of mailboxes shall be coordinated with the City Engineering Department prior to their installation. 30. The Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks, SCS, Montana Department of Environmental Quality and Army Corps of Engineers shall be contacted regarding the proposed project and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be obtained prior to plan and specification approval. 31. If construction activities related to the project result in the disturbance of more than one acre of natural ground, an erosion/sediment control plan may be required. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality may need to be contacted by the applicant to determine if a Stormwater Discharge Permit is necessary. If a permit is required by the State, the developer shall demonstrate to the City full permit compliance. 08-02-04 - 15 - FYI: Any site developments greater than four units on one lot for Phase II, and for future phases will require site plan review. All future phases of Valley West will be evaluated against the Unified Development Ordinance. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Review of proposed master plan for further development of the Bozeman Deaconess Foundation property. per Condition No. 21 for Bozeman Deaconess Hospital (Z-03173) Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Associate Planner Morris, dated August 2, 2004. Planning Director Epple presented the staff report on behalf of Associate Planner Morris, reminding the Commission that several years ago the hospital received approval to build a five-story hospital addition with condition number 21, which required them to work with the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board to develop a set of land use guidelines for the use of the balance of hospital property that is in proximity to Burke Park and the City cemetery. The committee held a number of meetings with Bozeman Deaconess Hospital staff and representatives, the Community Mediation Center facilitated dialog between those parties, and now they have jointly come up with a set of development guidelines for the balance of the hospital property. Planning Director Epple stressed this was not a contentious or dispute-laden process at all. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the development guidelines proposed by Bozeman Deaconess Hospital to satisfy Condition 21 for a conditional use permit for the construction of the fourth and fifth floors of Medical Office Building IV be approved. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Discussion - revision process for the Unified Development Ordinance and establish timeline Planning Director Epple stated staff needs specific direction from the Commission as to the amount of time to be allowed for public comment. The Planning Board has endorsed this process and recommends this process be used for revision of the Unified Development Ordinance. Staff needs Commission authorization for the process, and then the creation of a timeline. The Planning Board talked in terms of 30 to 45 days, leaning more toward 45 days. Mayor Cetraro stated his preference for 30 days, while Commissioner Krauss favored 45 days. Commissioner Youngman suggested 60 days because a large portion of the community is gone because of summer activities. Sixty days would give people time to get back into town, allow Boards to meet that don't meet during the summer, and allow people ample opportunity to make suggestions. Commissioner Krauss stated he concurs with providing 60 days for pUblic comment, adding that owner occupancy of accessory dwelling units in R-2 areas should be considered as part of the revision. He asked if there is anything that can be done to tighten up this process to allow more time on the front end. The Planning Director responded some of these items will be a quick turnaround, and staff has committed to moving this process along as quickly as possible. The preliminary budget has included some funding for staff to work on this, and staff is ready to devote their energies to it. Commissioner Youngman asked when the legal review would come about. Acting City Attorney Cooper responded by making reference to the sequence of necessary actions included in the instructions proposed by the Planning Board. He stated that legal review could be sought at various stages, but most likely at actions enumerated no. 5, recommendations by advisory boards are batched up and forwarded to City Commission; no. 7, actions by the Commission to direct the beginning of the formal amendment process are taken with specific policies to be amended having been identified; no. 8, the actual text of revisions is developed to respond to the Commission direction; no. 12, City Commission conducts public hearings on the proposed amendments and decides to amend or not; and no. 13, staff drafts ordinance(s) to formally carry out any decisions to amend. Acting City Attorney Cooper also stated that the sequencing 08-02-04 --....-.....----- ______on____... - 16- could be shortcut, depending on the particular revisions. If there is a very strong consensus for a particular amendment, the Planning Board or Zoning Commission can, at any time, initiate text changes, which would then come to the Commission. Commissioner Krauss inquired if the Commission has to make the finding that this is an intrinsic part of adopting such a large document. The Acting City Attorney responded that the action to be taken this evening is to formalize and adopt the revision process and then to establish the amount of time allowed for public input. He recommended that the Commission be mindful that, at any time, if an applicant meets the requirement for existing codes; and they have an interest in amending the code, they can come in and pay the fee to have it reviewed for amendment. Acting City Manager Brey pointed out the Commission can anticipate that certain portions will be very straightforward, others will be more conceptual, and still others will require legal research; and it is important to keep track of those. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the Commission authorize the revision process and establish a timeline of 60 days for public comment to be received. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. ADDointments to (a) Community Alcohol Coalition and (b) Zonina Commission Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Deputy Clerk of the Commission DeLathower, dated July 29, forwarding the list of applicants for the various boards. Commissioner Krauss asked if, when the Commission doesn't make an appointment, it automatically opens it up for other applications; and does that have to be a motion, or is that assumed. Acting City Manager Brey responded that over time, the appointment process has gotten looser in regard to things like that, but it is not inappropriate for Commissioners to go out to seek people who desire to serve because it is necessary to have fully appointed boards. Commissioner Youngman suggested the appointment policy should be added to the rules of procedure because the public doesn't understand why the Commission actively recruits additional applications when there are already applications on file. Commissioner Krauss stated his assumption has been that if the Commission doesn't appoint a member, it can encourage new applications for that board. He wants to ensure that the Commission sees all applications, even if that individual has been previously appointed to a board, because applications are good for a year. He suggested the creation of a database of candidates and application expiration dates. He would like this item brought forward for Commission discussion on a future agenda. Community Alcohol Coalition. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that Henry Graham be appointed to replace Peter Beland as the Bozeman High School student representative on the Community Alcohol Coalition, with a one-year term to expire on June 30, 2005. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Zoning Commission. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that Cliff Chisholm be appointed to replace Scott Hedglin's appointment at the July 12 meeting, with an initial term to expire on January 31, 2006. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Discussion - FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1 ) Memo from Alec Hansen, Executive Director of the Montana League of Cities and Towns, dated July 27, announcing the annual convention scheduled for October 6-8 in Kalispell. 08-02-04 - 17 - (2) Copy of a memo from Neighborhood Coordinator Oulman to Engineering Assistant Kerr, dated July 26, regarding a meeting on traffic calming for North 24th Avenue. (3) Memo from Neighborhood Coordinator Oulman, dated July 20, regarding the community discussion on neighborhoods and renting, to be sponsored by the InterNeighborhood Council and the Neighborhoods Program. (4) Updated list of planning projects to be considered at upcoming meetings, dated July 30, 2004. (5) Agenda for the County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 am on Tuesday, August 3, at the Courthouse. (6) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 am on Tuesday, August 3, at the Professional Building. (7) Agenda for the Zoning Commission meeting to be held at 7:00 pm on Tuesday, August 3, and notice that the Planning Board meeting has been cancelled due to the lack of agenda items. Acting City Manager Brey noted the following during his FYI: 1) There was a bomb scare today at the Bozeman Hotel; and during the building search, materials were found that raised suspicions. Consequently, Main Street and Rouse Avenue were closed, pedestrians were kept out, and City Hall was evacuated and closed from 12:30 pm until 2:00 pm. Nothing was found, but it has sparked the fear that this incident will spawn imitators. 2) Some of the Commissioners received notification of a matching awards program by the National Forest Foundation for watershed health and restoration projects. The deadlines for application this year were January and July 30th. That information has now been passed along to the Grants Administrator so she can start preparing for next year and have the application in for the January selection. 3) Distributed copies of a letter from the law firm of Goetz, Gallik, and Baldwin, PC, representing Gallatin Center Limited Partnership. 4) The City has received a bill from Place Architecture for $76,000 for design fees for the parking garage, claiming it is their intellectual property. 5) All of the employee evaluations have not been completed; but it appears there will be enough money, after raises, to add $50,000 for parks and $5,000 for Galavan back into the budget. During his FYI, Planning Director Epple' noted he a ndA ssociateP lanner Saunders w illb e i n Missoula most of this week attending the Western Planner Regional Conference. While there, he intends to talk with his colleagues in Missoula regarding annexation districts, which allow areas to be annexed while not delivering full services to them for a period of time. He suspects this could be applicable to the old jurisdictional areas. Director of Public Service Arkell shared the following FYI items: 1) She met with employees of the Forest Service regarding proposals to do studying of the watershed and possible fuel reductions there. When the Forest Service does their fuel reductions, it makes sense for the City to do it at the same time. A memorandum of understanding will be coming forward allowing the fuel reductions to be done at the same time. Commissioner Youngman suggested that should come to the Watershed Council first, and the Director of Public Service agreed. Commissioner Kirchhoff pointed out the City makes improvements and updates to assets that belong to the citizens without their input and asked if public input was going to be requested, or if this will be an internal decision. Acting City Manager Brey said this is a decision the Commission makes, and they will agree to the strategy or not in a public meeting. 2) Distributed a map of the proposed Bozeman gateway project, noting Mitchell Development proposes to build the roads before development is undertaken. Those roads will provide a huge transportation system for the city. Planning Director Epple noted the developers intend to avoid the substantial riparian area located on this property. In the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, this area is planned as community commercial center, and staff expects to see a significant community shopping area developed on this site. Commissioner Youngman, during her FYI, offered the following: 1) The parking garage meeting last week was great, and Jimmy Pepper did a good job. There were lots of people in attendance, and they were active participants. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted the following FYI items: 1) Thanked Planning staff for the area maps recently included with staff reports and expressed his desire to have streamways and trail segments 08-02-04 ------------ ------...--..--- ..-- ----- ..-----....--.---.-..-...-... - --..-.---.--..-..- - 18 - included in the future. Planning Director Epple stated they will be included when they become available. 2) Stated his desire to have a work session regarding accessory dwelling units in R-2 zoned areas. Adjournment. 10:03 pm There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye bein Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngma an yor Cetraro; those voting No, none. . CETRARO, Mayor ATTEST: ~~~~ Clerk of the Commission PREPARED BY: ~~eM~ Deputy Clerk of the Commission 08-02-04 ~