Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-06-28 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN,MONTANA June 28, 2004 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, on Monday, June 28,2004, 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, Staff 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 - ADri126. May 3. May 17. May 24. June 7. June 9 Stueck. June 9 Johnson. June 11 Hales. June 11 Kukulski. June 14 and June 21. 2004 It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the minutes of the meeting of June 21 , 2004, be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: thosevoting 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, June 7, June 9 Stueck, June 9 Johnson, June 11 Hales, June 11 Kukulski and June 14, 2004, to a later date. Consent Items Acting City Manager Brey presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Commission Resolution No. 3698 - reimbursement resolution for SDecial ImDrovement District No. 674 (Bridaer Center Subdivision) COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3698 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, RELATING TO REIMBURSEMENT OF APPROPRIATE COSTS FOR CITY OF BOZEMAN SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 674. Ordinance No.1615 - amend zonina from "R-3" (Residential-Medium-densitv) to "R-1" (Residential-Sinale-household. Low-densitv) on aDDroximately 33 acres in the University Subdivision: finallY adoDt ORDINANCE NO. 1615 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONE MAP BY AMENDING THE ZONING DESIGNATION FROM "R-3" (RESIDENTIAL-MEDIUM-DENSITY DISTRICT) TO "R-1" (RESIDENTIAL-SINGLE-HOUSEHOLD, LOW-DENSITY DISTRICT) ON APPROXIMATELY 33 ACRES IN THE UNIVERSITY SUBDIVISION, LOCATED IN THE NW% OF SECTION 18, T2S, R6E, PMM, CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA. Acknowledae receiDt of aDDlication for annexation - 1.93 acres described as Lots 26 and 27. Beatty's Alder Court Subdivision. Tract 1 of Document No. 205-4756. Tract 2 of Document 205-4753. and Tract E of 191 F 2361 (1523 Alder Court Lane) - Shaun Shahan for Stoltz Beck ProDerties: refer to staff 06-28-04 - 2 - Authorize Actina City Manaaer to sian - Acceptance of Pedestrian Access Easement from Georae Westlake and Kay Martinen - across lot 1. Block 1. Westlake's Second Subdivision (for sidewalk alona North 7th Ayenue adiacent to Famous Dave's. 1230 North 7th Avenue) Authorize Actina City Manaaer to sian - Acceptance of Sewer Pipeline Access Easement and Aareement - Hinesley Family Limited Partnership No.1 - 30- foot-wide easement across lot 1. Block 6. laurel Glen Subdivision. Phase 1 (extendina west from Forestalen Drive) Authorize Actina Citv Manaaer to sian - Professional Services Aareement for Stormwater Facilitv Plan - HDR Enaineerina. Inc.. Missoula. Montana 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 Dan Guggenheim, 418 North Wallace Avenue, addressed the Commission regarding traffic safety on North Wallace Avenue, particularly with the additional traffic generated from the construction taking place on Rouse Avenue. Presentation of budaet for the City-Countv Health Department for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 . Health Officer Stephanie Nelson Included in the Commissioners' packets was a copy of the preliminary budget for the City-County Health Department for Fiscal Year 2004-2005. Distributed during the meeting was a copy of the compilation of the 2003 Community/Consumer Survey. County Health Officer Nelson presented the preliminarily approved budget, which was approved by the Board of Health in May and preliminarily approved on Tuesday by the County Commission. She noted there are really three budgets within the Health Department budget; one for environmental health, one for administrative, and the human services budget. Environmental health has the largest fund activity. The Health Department is supported by general tax dollars, contracts, grants, and fees for services. Health Officer Nelson then noted that, according to the survey, the overwhelmingly number one health issue facing this county is affordable health care. The number one service needed is affordable dental care. Mental health care accessibility is another top health issue facing this community. Barriers to use of services include unfamiliarity with services provided and the hours of services. Health Officer Nelson pointed out that environmental health services experienced increases in the number of septic system permits issued, septic inspections, and general complaints. Human services data shows the Maternal and Child Health program numbers have been stable, with an increase in enrollment in the breast health and cervical screening programs. The percentage of two-year-olds who are fully immunized has declined to 85 percent, with the goal being 90 percent. Health Officer Nelson reviewed the strategic activities for the upcoming year, which include increasing the capacity to electronically monitor the public health and disseminate that information, to get the public health record available electronically, and to provide a presence for the review and approval of wastewater systems. Commissioner Hietala inquired about the long-term facilities plan. Health Officer Nelson responded the facilities question has been dealt with by the County Commission in the capital improvements program. 06-28-04 . ---------.-------- __.__.___n_.. ..._ - 3 - She believes the County is working toward keeping the Health Department downtown; close to other human services support programs and the customer. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Commission approve the preliminary budget for the City-County Health Department for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 and forward it to the County Commission for final adoption. 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. Authorize Actina City Managerto sian - Interlocal Aareement with the Town of Manhattan for buildina insDection services Acting City Manager Brey reminded the Commissioners that this agreement had been removed from the Consent Agenda at last week's meeting to give staff an opportunity to respond to questions from a Commissioner. Staff Attorney Wordal explained the nature of the City's relationship with the town of Manhattan for building inspection services and clarified the table of charges. Manhattan desires to have a building inspection program to ensure quality of construction and assure compliance with state and local building codes and has asked the City of Bozeman to provide those services. This contract mirrors the contract the City currently has with Livingston, which has worked well. Manhattan has approved this agreement and is anxious to begin the program because they have some major building projects ready for review. The City of Bozeman will charge Manhattan a trip fee of $75, irregardless of the amount of time spent there; and Manhattan will also pay fees that are in accordance with building fees currently charged. The basis for those charges comes from a manual, which is becoming the standard across the country, that provides a mechanism for determining costs based on how much time it takes to conduct an acceptable review process. Commissioner Hietala expressed his interest in a cost/benefit summary to assure the City isn't losing money on this proposal. Ms. Wardal stated the City is not trying to make a profit, which is why the charges are the same for Manhattan as they are in Bozeman, plus the trip fee. GK Reiser, 1603 South Church Avenue, said he is a member of the task force to investigate the feasibility/desirability of establishing a county-wide building permit program; and the same questions have come up at their meetings. By state statute, building departments are prohibited from taking in any mare money than it costs them to process applications. They can, however, have a one-year equivalent of money set aside to run the program. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the Acting City Manager be authorized to sign the Interlocal Agreement with the Town of Manhattan far building inspection services. 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. Ordinance No. 1616 - deletina Section 9.70.010: renaming Title 9. ChaDter 7. renumberina various sections in Title 9: and deletina Sections 10.08.272 and 10.08.210. revisina and addina Drovisions to chaDter entitled "Alcohol Policy" Included in the Commissioners' packets was a copy of revised Ordinance No. 1616, entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 1616 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING FOR REORGANIZATION OF AND GENERAL REVISIONS TO THE ALCOHOL PROVISIONS OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE SUCH THAT THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE BE AMENDED SUCH THAT TITLE 9 ARTICLE 7 BE AMENDED TO TITLE 9 CHAPTER 7 AND SHALL CONTAIN THE REVISED ALCOHOL PROVISIONS AND THAT SECTIONS 9.70.010; 9.30.010; 9.32.005 THROUGH 9.32.040; 06-28-04 ---------------- --.----.- -4- 9.40.010; 9.84.010 THROUGH 9.84.040; 10.08.272; AND 10.08.210 BE REPEALED AND DECLARING THAT SUCH SECTIONS BE NULL AND VOID AND OF NO EFFECT. Also included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Staff Attorney Wordal, dated June 24, identifying the revisions in the ordinance and forwarding additional information on the proposed program. Acting City Manager Brey reminded the Commissioners that several issues were identified during discussion on the proposed ordinance at the June 14th meeting, and the ordinance has been revised to address those concerns. Staff Attorney Wordal reviewed the changes to this ordinance and pointed out that revised version two is the one to be considered by the Commission this evening. Glenn Puffer, Community Alcohol Coalition (CAC) member and Montana State University (MSU) Assistant Dean of Students, stated the ordinance was good before; and it is even better now. This is a really good ordinance that will serve the community well. He assured the Commission that MSU is prepared to comply with, and enforce, the ordinance as written; and no objections to this ordinance have been raised by anyone at MSU. Mike Hope, 322 North 20 Avenue and representing the hospitality industry, congratulated Ms. Wordal on a job well done. The local tavern association feels this ordinance should move forward because it will help control the problems of open containers on the streets and littering. Mr. Hope stated that, as a tavern owner and a member of the community, this is an ordinance he can live with. Bill Robinson, vice chair of the CAC, noted quite a bit of time was spent addressing Commission concerns when developing this revised ordinance. This ordinance is now one everyone is happy with and is a great example of how the CAC is meant to work. Commissioner Krauss thanked Staff Attorney Wordal for her hard work on this ordinance and asked for clarification of portions of Section 1. He questioned how the irresponsible consumption and possession of alcoholic beverages section ties in with this ordinance, which is about controlling the use and sale of alcohol on public property. Ms. Wordal replied that one of the things that came out of the Bozeman Alcohol Policy Advisory Council (BAPAC) was the recommendation that the Commission make a broad policy statement, adding there could be several more alcohol ordinances coming before the Commission. This was written as an expression of what the BAPAC and CAC wanted as a basic public statement. Commissioner Hietala asked how MSU and County properties are treated in this ordinance. Staff Attorney Wordal stated those properties are included in this ordinance, but there are exemptions if they are following their own governmental policies. MSU does have their own alcohol policy, which states that if a function is going to be held in a campus building, it must be through the university's catering service. This ensures all alcohol policies will be followed, so that would be an approved event that would not require a City exemption. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff's suggestion of alternate language in Section 1, Acting City Manager Brey stated any changes the Commission desires can be made between now and final ordinance adoption two weeks from now. Commissioner Krauss stated he continues to have problems with the potential encroachment on individual's private rights with this ordinance. He would like to see the word "public" added into Section 1, line 7, after the word "irresponsible" for clarity. Commissioner Youngman noted that one problem is that the City Police currently break up loud parties of drinkers on private property whose noise, vomit, and litter goes off private property, thus having a public effect. She would, therefore, favor a definition that is not limited to public places. Staff Attorney Wordal pointed out there are state statutes regarding public nuisance, which includes parties in private residences that spill over into the public. Commissioner Krauss reminded the Commission the noise ordinance is in p lace to deal with excessive noise from loud parties. 06-28-04 -5- Commissioner Youngman thanked the CAC, the local tavern association, Staff AttorneyWordal, and the public who continued to work on this ordinance to get it to the polished state it is in now. She expressed her delight to vote on the City's first alcohol ordinance. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that Ordinance No. 1616, deleting Section 9.70.010; renaming Title 9, Chapter 7, renumbering various sections in Title 9; and deleting Sections 10.08.272 and 10.08.210, revising and adding provisions to chapter entitled "Alcohol Policy", be provisionally adopted; and that it be brought back in two weeks for final adoption. 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. ExemDtion from subdivision review - court-ordered subdivision of property described as a Dortion of the NE%. SE%. Section 9. T2S. R5E. MPM (portion of the Vallev West Annexation) - Nanci Norton Evans. Personal Representative for the Estate of David F. Norton Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Planning Director Andy Epple, dated June 24, 2004, attached to which was a letter from District Judge Mike Salvagni, dated June 15, forwarding a Court Order for subdivision of land currently held in the Estate of David F. Norton. Planning Director Epple reviewed the property location, noting this parcel was originally part of the Norton Ranch and was annexed and zoned as part of the Valley West annexation and subdivision. Mr. Norton's heirs are now attempting to parcel off these 40 acres as a separate tract from the balance of the estate, so it can be sold and the proceeds divided among the heirs. This is a court-ordered subdivision, and staff appreciates the opportunity to comment on it. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission approve the exemption from subdivision review for the court-ordered subdivision of property described as a portion of the Northeast one-quarter of the Southeast one-quarter of Section 9, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian, lying within the Valley West Annexation, held in ownership by the Estate of David F. Norton. 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 hearina - Conditional Use Permit - allow commercial kitchen as home-based business in existing residence on Lots 1. 2 and the north 20 feet of Lot 3. Block 32. Imes Addition - Valerie Ross for Ravmond Ross (20 East Tamarack Street) (Z-04104) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit requested by Valerie Ross for Raymond Ross under Application No. Z-041 04, to allow the installation and operation of a commercial kitchen as a home-based business in the existing residence on Lots 1, 2 and the north 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 32, Imes Addition. The sUbject property is located at 20 East Tamarack Street. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Planning Director Epple presented the staff report on behalf of Associate Planner Sanford. He reviewed this application, noting the applicant indicates she will produce baked goods in this kitchen, with no sales to be conducted at the site. She will deliver the goods to various restaurants and caterers. This proposal was evaluated in light of the various criteria, and staff recommends conditional approval. Staff's written report can be found in the Commission packet. Planning Director Epple noted this application does fall into the category of allowable home-based business, as defined in the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). The UDO differentiates between home-based businesses that are allowed as accessory uses in residential zoning districts and home-based businesses that are allowed as conditional uses in residential zoning districts. Conditional use home-based businesses are generally more intensive in nature than those that would be allowed as an accessory use, and they must receive and adhere to the conditions of approval. Two letters of opposition have been received. However, the conditional use permit is very specific for this use at this site, and no other uses would be allowed. Also the conditional use permit can be revoked if valid neighborhood complaints are received. 06-28-04 __n_..n.__.._....._ ..-.----.....- - 6 - Commissioner Krauss noted that Section 18.40.110 of the UDO requires home-based businesses be "clearly incidental and secondary to the use of the dwelling for residential purposes and shall not change the character of the dwelling". He asked what criteria the Commission would use to determine this use would be clearly incidental and secondary. Planning Director Epple responded the criteria is subjective; but two factors to take into consideration are if the average neighbor, under normal circumstances, would not be aware of its existence and the exterior character of the dwelling is not changed. Staff does not feel this use will create additional noise or an excessive amount of trash. Valerie Ross, applicant, thanked staff for presenting this application well and responded to the question regarding this use being incidental and secondary to the dwelling by saying she has two children and a stepdaughter who will be living in this house. Ms. Ross added that less than 30 percent of the structure area will be utilized for the commercial kitchen, and she has been baking and selling her baked goods at the farmers' market for the past six years without any neighborhood complaints. Commissioner Krauss stated he appreciates the applicant being honest and going through this process because he believes there are home-based businesses operating in this community who have not been given the City's blessing. Raymond Ross, 13750 Lone Bear Road, owner and financial backer of this venture, noted this modification will cost in excess of $25,000 and will probably degrade the value of the home as a residential facility. This use will have no adverse effect on the neighborhood and will be transparent to the public. He asked Commission support for this proposal as presented. Neil Tack, 815 North Black Avenue, stated they requested a two-year limitation on this conditional use permit because if this business isn't successful, they do not want someone to be able to start another business in this home. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. Commissioner Krauss noted the Commission did receive sufficient testimony to show there will be no adverse effects on this or the neighboring properties and the required consideration and findings have been satisfied. Commissioner Youngman assured the neighbors that if this business operation ceases, the conditional use permit will also cease; and anyone else who wishes to operate a business at this location will have to go through the approval process. Commissioner Kirchhoff agreed with staff's findings and said he feels comfortable with the safeguard that if the neighbors have a complaint about this business, they have the opportunity to come before the Commission with their complaint. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Conditional Use Permit requested by Valerie Ross for Raymond Ross under Application No. Z-041 04, to allow the installation and operation of a commercial kitchen as a home-based business in the existing residence on Lots 1, 2 and the north 20 feet of Lot 3, Block 32, Imes Addition, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The business shall be delivery only; no retail or wholesale customers shall visit the site. 2. That the right to a use and occupancy permit shall be contingent upon the fulfillment of all general and special conditions imposed by the conditional use permit procedure and required code provisions. (Section 18.34.100.C.1). 3. That all of the special conditions shall constitute restrictions running with the land use, shall apply and be adhered to by the owner of the land, successors or assigns, shall be binding upon the owner of the land, his successors or assigns, shall be consented to in writing, and shall be recorded as such with the County Clerk and Recorder's Office by the property owner prior to the issuance of any building permits, final site plan approval or commencement of the conditional use (Section 18.34.100.C.2). 06-28-04 -------- ...-".--..........- - 7 - 4. All code provisions shall be met, the following provisions in particular: . Resident occupants shall conduct the home-based business with not more than one on-premise, half-time, non-resident employee (Section 18.40.110.0.1). . Home-based business by conditional use permit may only be allowed on lots occupied by single-household detached dwellings. If the structure is ever converted to a duplex, the conditional use permit for a commercial kitchen shall be null and void (Section 18.40.110.0.7). . If any exterior modifications are required or proposed for mechanical equipment, signage, venting or any other change, the applicant shall submit drawings depicting the exterior modification for certificate of appropriateness review and approval. Any exterior modifications shall also be shown on building permit plans (Section 18.28.040). . Rooftop mechanical equipment, if installed, should be screened. Screening should be incorporated into the roof form when possible. Ground mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from public rights-of-way with walls, fencing or plant materials (Section 18.38.050.F). . A building permit must be obtained prior to the commencement of any construction (interior and exterior), and a business license must be obtained prior to commencement of business operations. . Complaints by citizens of Bozeman may be cause for termination of the home-based business. However, should such complaint be filed, the operator is entitled to an appeal to the City Commission for a public hearing. The City Commission shall determine whether or not the filed complaint identifies sufficient violation to the Unified Development Ordinance to warrant termination or modification ofthe home based business (Section 18.40.11 O.E). 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. Break 8:10 - 8:16 pm Mayor Cetraro declared a break from 8:10 pm until 8:16 pm in accordance with Commission policy. Public hearina - variances from Section 18.44.010.Aoo Bozeman Municipal Code. to not provide a street access arranged to allow suitable development of property to the north; Section 18.44.01 O.H.. to not provide secondary or emeraencv access; Section 18.44.020.A.2.. to not meet City street standards without beina reviewed as a planned unit development Section 18.44.060. to not construct Edaewater Drive and East Lincoln Street as City standard streets; and Section 18.44.080.A.. to not construct sidewalks on Edaewater Drive or East lincoln Street - HKM Enaineering. Incoo for Bart and Berit Manion (425 East Lincoln Street) (Z-04114) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the variances requested by HKM Engineering, Inc., for Bart and Berit Manion under Application No. Z-04114, from various sections of the Bozeman Municipal Code, as follows: (1) from Section 1 8.44.010.A., to not provide a street access arranged to allow suitable development of property to the north; (2) from Section 18.44.010.H., to not provide secondary or emergency access; (3) from Section 18.44.020.A.2., to not meet City street standards without being reviewed as a planned unit development; ( 4) from Section 1 8.44.060, ton ot construct Edgewater Drive and East Lincoln Street as City standard streets; and (5) from Section 18.44.080.A., to not 06-28-04 -.--------...--- . . _._n_m____._.__.m. - 8- construct sidewalks on Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street. The subject property is described as Lot 2, Certificate of Survey No. 203, and a portion of Tract 1, Certificate of Survey No. 1557, Bozeman Creek Annexation, and is commonly known as 425 East Lincoln Street. In addition to the public comment attached to the staff report, included in the packets were letters of concern/opposition from: GK Reiser, 1603 South Church Avenue; Frank Munshower, Chair of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association; North Christie Park Rezoning Committee; Charles M. Paden, 507 Ice Pond Road; Michael and Lori Keyshae, 1504 South Rouse Avenue; Mike and Nancy Etchingham, 1510 South Rouse Avenue; John and Karin Boyd, 1416 South Montana Avenue; Katharine Cassidy, 1316 South Rouse Avenue; Jimmy and Sherry Pepper, 1322 South Rouse Avenue; and Brian Gallik, attorney representing Jim and Sherry Pepper. Distributed just prior to the meeting were a letter from Brock Albin, dated June 25, expressing support for the Manions' right to develop their property in a responsible manner, and a memo from John Harper, Recreation and Parks Advisory Board subdivision review committee, recommending denial of the application. Acting City Manager Brey reminded the Commissioners this proposal is requesting zoning variances, which require four affirmative votes for approval, and the site plan review follows. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Senior Planner Skelton presented the staff report. He, too, reminded everyone that the zoning variances are going to be considered first; and then the Commission will consider the site plan review. The applicants have elected to not process this proposal as a residential planned unit development, but have chosen, instead, to submit this application for site plan review with variances. This application is for five variances to the UDO and is driven by HKM Engineering, representing the Manions, who desire to develop two parcels of land. The land is owned by the Manions and the Sobrepenas, and the parcel owned by the Sobrepenas would require a subdivision exemption for the relocation of a common boundary line between the two adjoining properties. This property is located in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan area. All variances requested are from Section 18.44 of the UDO. Thisllpplication has been reviewed against all the applicable criteria; and based on that criteria, staff recommends denial of all five of the requested variances. Staff's comprehensive findings can be found in the written staff report. Senior Planner Skelton reminded the Commissioners that they must find that granting these variances will advance the public interest and provide protection for the public health, safety, and general welfare. In addition, the Commission must issue findings setting forth factual evidence that the established criteria have been satisfied. Those criteria include: 1) the variance will not be contrary to, and will serve, the public interest; 2) the variance is necessary, owing to conditions unique to the property, to avoid an unnecessary hardship which would unavoidably result from the enforcement of the literal meaning of the title, and 3) the variance will observe the spirit of this title, including the adopted growth policy, and do substantial justice. Senior Planner Skelton noted staff feels these requested variances are not in the best interest of the public and are contrary to the UDO. The applicants have argued that due to the 1 OO-year floodplain boundary, related to the Bozeman Creek, they cannot meet the requirements of the UDO. The Development Review Committee feels that argument is unfounded, realizing there are numerous condominium developments in the community that have been developed at reasonable densities and have incorporated these hardships into their amenities. Additionally, the Commission can consider construction of private streets in portions of the 1 OO-year floodplain boundary. Senior Planner Skelton pointed out these variances are being requested to circumvent the need to comply with Chapter 18.44, Transportation Facilities and Access, of the UDO. The applicants are requesting variances to not provide street access arranged to allow the suitable development of the property to the north, to not provide a secondary or emergency access to facilitate traffic movements, to not meet City street standards without being reviewed as a planned unit development, to not construct Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street as City standard streets, and to not construct sidewalks on Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street. During its review of this application, the Development Review Committee found the proposal is not in conformance with the UDO, the proposed project would impact existing and anticipated traffic and parking conditions, the proposal would not provide adequate pedestrian and vehicular ingress, egress, and circulation, the proposal will have an adverse effect upon abutting property and future development in the area, and the proposal is in conflict with the goals and objectives of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Senior Planner Skelton reminded the Commission that during the development of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, over 40 percent of the respondents cited transportation as the number one issue. Staff has received 12 to 14 letters of opposition to this proposal and the requested variances. One letter of support has been received. 06-28-04 ----...-----.--- - 9 - Commissioner Hietala inquired about the zoning on this property. Senior Planner Skelton answered it is zoned R-2, which allows the development of duplexes at a density of six dwelling units per acre. The total acreage of this parcel is 1.925 acres, including the portion to the north belonging to the Sobrepenas. Planning Director Epple added that duplex condos on R-2 zoned ground are reasonable and approveable; the concerns with this project are with the requested variances and not meeting the transportation facility requirements, which can be met without variances. Commissioner Krauss questioned the requirement to extend East Lincoln Street east to the watercourse setback for Bozeman Creek. Senior Planner Skelton noted that this is a subdivision proposal and there needs to be connectivity to the properties further east. The City attempts to extend current City standards as far as reasonably possible. An example of not requiring this extension would be Professional Drive, which does not connect with College Street. Now the Bridger Apartments 2 project requires the extension and connectivity of Professional Drive with College Street. Therefore, it is imperative, for the same reasons, that the City provide provisions to improve its transportation system as much as reasonable without encroaching into the 75-foot watercourse setback. Planning Director Epple added the standard is to require the extension of the transportation facility to the property line, and the next property owner must extend it to the edge of his property, and so forth. Additionally, this is a public right-of-way. Commissioner Krauss offered that if stopping a street 75 feet from a creek is reasonable, then a case can be made that it is reasonable to end the street somewhere else. Planning Director Epple responded Lincoln Street will need to be extended to the east to provide access and drive approaches to the two existing units, which staff believes is reasonable. Joby Sabol, representing the applicants, reminded the Commissioners that the buzz words are "hardship owing to the land". This piece of property has unique characteristics, including topography to the north which drops off substantially to the floodplain and the floodplain adjacent to Bozeman Creek itself. He acknowledged it is possible to build a road in a floodplain and to obtain the appropriate permits, but he admonished the Commissioners to ask themselves, given the adopted Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, who would this street be intended to serve. Mr. Sabol continued, saying that to develop this property, it almost screams for variances; and if the variances, as requested, are not granted, it will be impossible to develop this property at the density the plan suggests is appropriate for this parcel. While there are condo projects whose streets were built to full city street standards and other projects that did not seek the variances that are being sought in this application, if the topography of that property required a variance, the landowners would have asked for a variance and would have been granted one. Variances are appropriate in this case. Clint Litle, HKM Engineering, representing the applicants, stated this is a small infill project that is in general compliance with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and R-2 zoning requirements. While no one likes variances, if there has ever been a location where variances are appropriate, this is it. The requested variances are minor and are warranted because of the undo hardships. Mr. Manion's property meets the variance criteria test because of the presence of the Bozeman Creek and the floodplain. Regarding the first variance, to not provide street access to the northern property boundary to facilitate development, the driveway between the condos is intended to meet this street connection goal. Right now they are planning a paved 24-foot wide drive, but they are willing to widen that to 30 feet to match other city developments. Addressing the second variance, Mr. Litle stated it is physically impossible to build a second access to this site because of the Bozeman Creek, the topography, and the 1 DO-year floodplain. The requested third variance, to not meet City street standards without being reviewed as a planned unit development, again, they are willing to widen the streets to 30 feet. The fourth variance, to not construct Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street as City standard streets, deals primarily with East Lincoln Street. The applicant wants to build the north half of Lincoln Street and install a 12-foot lane on the south side, which isn't an unusual request. They feel the adjoiner should do the rest of the work. The last requested variance, to not install sidewalks on Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street, deals primarily with the sidewalk along the north side of Lincoln Street. They do not want to install the sidewalks because there are existing evergreen trees there which would need to be taken down to build the sidewalk. Jimmy Pepper, 1322 South Rouse Avenue, stated this application has a significant number of serious problems, including legal issues. He and his wife own the property north ofthe Sobrepena's parcel; and if the right of way is not extended to their common property line, it constitutes a taking of their property, as well as their neighbor's property to the north. Mr. Pepper said he would argue that this is a serious breach of their property rights; and, under no circumstances, should this variance be granted. The Sobrepenas may place a conservation easement on the balance of their property north of the proposed condominiums, which will land-lock the properties to the north. Therefore, the Commission should include 06-28-04 ..---- -.-----..-. -..--.... -10- the Sobrepena property as part of its variance analysis, and thus require that the road extend through both properties to the lot to the north of the Sobrepenas. Mr. Pepper maintained there is absolutely no physical hardship going with this land; in fact, he mows that "slope", and he has never tipped over. Mr. Pepper pointed out the flood plain is not really the limiting factor; Mr. Manion's house is because with the required setbacks, he cannot get sufficient space between the buildings. The location of Bozeman Creek and the floodplain existed at the time Mr. Manion purchased his property, and the development constraints were well known at that time. This project cannot be approved without the variances, and the variances are not approveable. However, the applicant can still develop his property without the variances, just not as currently submitted. Commissioner Krauss asked if the conservation easement were put in place on the Sobrepenas' property, would that constitute an abrogation of the Peppers' property rights. Mr. Pepper responded if the easement included no roads, as presently configured, that would constitute an abrogation of their property rights. While he intends to conserve his land, the value will still be diminished if this proposal is approved. Mr. Pepper then distributed maps of Alternative 3 to the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, which shows a road aligning with Garfield Street. Bill Phillips, 1629 South Church Avenue, noted he is impressed that HKM Engineering, Mr. Litle, and Mr. Sabol think this is a good project. They are professionals and he respects their opinions, and he feels that if they believe this project is a good idea, the Commission should approve it. Frank Munshower, 1407 South Bozeman Avenue, agreed with the Planning Department staff report and Mr. Pepper's comments, as well. He questioned if the variances are granted, why there isn't a street connection required to connect with Church Avenue. This configuration was proposed in Alternatives 2 and 3 of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan. He requested that the Commission be logical in its thinking and require a street connection to Church Avenue. Brian Close, 406 East Olive Street, recalled there was concern expressed of undermining people's ability to develop their property along the corridor if they choose. While conservation is the goal, the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan specifically provides, should someone want to develop their property, for a north/south connection to Lincoln Street so as to not cut off the property owners to the north. The effect of these variances would be to cut those people off. Mr. Manion is wanting to build up his property as much as possible and cut off his neighbors to the north to give him free open space, which is not the goal of the Commission. Mr. Close requested that the Commission deny these variances and require Mr. Manion to go through the planned unit development process. Mr. Manion should also be required to respect the property rights of all his neighbors. Sally Sobrepena, 1417 South Church Avenue, said she is aware the City has a vision for this corridor, which is well and good, but the property owners also have a vision; and she doesn't understand why those visions can't be compromised. Property owners in this area were forced to annex, even though the City has not provided them with any services. Now NorthWestern Energy is going to erect large power poles on the property, and the City wants to install sewer lines. There must be a compromise because the City can't take everything and give nothing in return. Mike Keyshae, 1504 South Rouse Avenue, noted this is untouched land that connects Bozeman to the mountains with access to Burke Park and Bozeman Creek; and it is a shame to see something like this erected in the middle of this property. It is very sad to see this gorgeous piece of land broken up like this, and he asked if there is any possibility of a land trade or open space commitment. Mike Etchingham, 1510 South Rouse Avenue, referred to his letter of June 22, which details the objections he has to this project. The surrounding area is going to be impacted by both increased traffic and parking because of the narrowness of East Lincoln Street. There is no contingency in the development plans for guest parking, and the proposed street is substandard in size and will not accommodate parking needs. Mr. Etchingham noted they were granted a variance from sidewalk installation when the Rouse Avenue sidewalks were installed; and they fear that if installation of sidewalks along Lincoln Street is required, it will require removal of 30-year-old trees from their front yard. T he Commission recently approved a change of zoning to R-1 throughout this neighborhood; and now eight condominium units are proposed to be built right next door, which will change the complexion of the entire neighborhood. Mr. Etchingham stated that of obvious concern to him is the resulting reduction in the value of their property if this application is approved. 06-28-04 - 11 - GK Reiser, 1603 South Church Avenue, referred to his letter of June 21, regarding the limited sewer capacity of the South Rouse sewer line. He pointed out the Commission recently rezoned property in the North Christie Field neighborhood to R-1, and among the conditions attached to that rezoning was the establishment of a 90-day transition period to a lIow any property 0 wner who wishes to convert their properties into duplexes or triplexes the opportunity to do so. Mr. Reiser contended the City cannot consider new development in this area until full sewer impact, resulting from changes in the North Christie Field neighborhood, is known and any remaining sewer capacity should belong to the South Church Avenue neighbors, who have been waiting 31 years to get City sewer service. Hugh Reid is in the process of rezoning his property and realigning the road, with plans to extend City water service. Mr. Reiser said he believes City sewer service should also be extended to that area. Gary Vodehnal, Gallatin Valley Land Trust, stated his main concern is with applicants' request to not provide sidewalks. He works on trail systems and is concerned with connections within the community, which requires a good sidewalk system. It is important to provide a way for children to get safely from this subdivision. If this sidewalk variance is granted, others will also want sidewalk variances. Leonard Baluski, 1416 South Rouse Avenue, said he is very disappointed that this proposal is in such close proximity to his house, noting this project will be entirely in his back yard. It is shocking to think of that and see it laid out on a map. Clint Litle addressed the north/south access, saying there will be a 40-foot public access and utility easement that will extend to the lot line. If the Commission is concerned with connectivity, they would agree to install a sidewalk on the south side of Lincoln Street. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. Senior Planner Skelton noted it is difficult to separate the variances from the site plan review. Regarding the first variance, a 40-foot wide easement will not work to provide an acceptable street standard for adequate vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Additionally, there needs to be 20 feet minimum from the garage to the sidewalk to allow for vehicle parking, which could be achieved with a specific design of the public street. Senior Planner Skelton stated this project should be considered as a planned unit development to get away from the need for variances, which are difficult to support and are not in the best interest of the public. Commissioner Krauss questioned the feasibility of the applicants' suggestion for a 48-foot public easement. Senior Planner Skelton responded the applicants are still requesting a variance to not provide street access to the property to the north. Planning Director Epple added the UDO calls for a standard access of 60 feet, with a variety of street widths; and if less than a 60-foot right-of-way is requested, the planned unit development process must be utilized. Planning staff has talked with the applicants regarding a 48-foot easement with a 29 foot back of curb to back of curb street, which would be a workable design that allows parking on one side of the street only. Staff recognizes this is a special area; and a 48-foot right- of-way with a 29-foot street would be adequate to handle the projected traffic on this street, even with further development. Commissioner Krauss questioned the requested variance to not provide a street access arranged to allow the suitable development of the property to the north, asking what that would be. Planning Director Epple answered "suitable", in light of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood plan and traffic constraints with a 48-foot roadway, would be low to medium density residential development because of constraints of the corridor. If the Manion's proposal moves ahead, the conservation preferred alternative for the corridor will be less likely to be implemented. If sewer capacity issues are resolved in the future, the Commission may be faced with proposals to change the zoning designations on the Pepper and Albin properties. Responding to Commissioner Krauss, Planning Director Epple noted that the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, conservation alternative, was adopted; but the property owners have development rights. If those rights are exercised by the applicants, with the street network as proposed, when those other properties to the north are developed, there will be inadequate rights-of-way; similar to Durston Road and Babcock Street now, where enough right-of-way was not obtained initially. If adequate rights-of-way, for access to the properties to the north, are provided now, staff will have done its job for future planning. If this developer doesn't develop the road to the property line, someone else will have to do so in the future; so staff expects the road to be developed to the northern property line by this applicant. 06-28-04 u______ - 12 - Senior Planner Skelton added that, regardless of street width, the Development Review Committee expects adequate streets and sidewalks will be provided. Staff believes if someone wants to develop their property at urban densities, t hey should also have to provide appropriate urban improvements. The applicants do not want to install sidewalks on the north side because of one or two trees; the majority of the trees are on private property, not in the right-of-way. Key points for the Commission to consider is that whatever growth occurs must be in compliance with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan and zoning ordinances. The vision and guiding rule is what will be in the best interest of the community. All other projects with street width variances have been reviewed as a planned unit development, and staff believes this project should be as well. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted it has been suggested that the entire Sobrepena property should be considered because a portion of that property is included in this proposal. Planning Director Epple stated the applicants are proposing to use a subdivision exemption that would readjust the common property boundary between the Manions and Sobrepenas. Staff does not feel that would be an abuse of subdivision regulations because, in this instance, there are two separate tracts of land held in separate ownership; and after this readjustment, there will still be two tracts held in separate ownership. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Staff Attorney Cooper stated if anyone Commissioner wants to pull any variance, based on any criteria, for separate consideration, that variance must be treated separately. The Commission can decide to act on all five variances together, or act on any or all of them separately. Commissioner Kirchhoff stated he is in general agreement with the Development Review Committee and Planning staff, who found that all five variances fail to meet the criteria for approval. He feels the requested variances are all self-imposed. This area is sensitive and does contain a floodplain, but this property could be developed within allowable standards. This development needs to be scaled back, rather than requesting variances. There are no topographical reasons for requesting these variances because roadways are allowed through floodplains, particularly if there are connections to existing roadways. Commissioner Youngman expressed her concurrence with Commissioner Kirchhoff's comments, noting that she has never known a development to not be required to create a connection to the next property. It has been consistent policy that one private property owner cannot prevent another private property owner from enjoying the same property rights. There is nothing in the public record that meets the variance criteria for hardship unique to the land because the applicants can develop this property, just not the way they desire. Commissioner Krauss noted that in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, Unified Development Ordinance, and Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan there is a commitment to preserving property rights. This type of development, at a much higher design standard, is planned for on this property. There is overwhelming evidence that this type of development is going to come to this property, and the Commission will be presented with a project that is suitable. Commissioner Krauss stated that, like the Planning Department has suggested, a better design for this property could incorporate street access to the property to the north. He, too, believes this must be reviewed as a planned unit development; and better design standards would, again, help with that. Edgewater Drive must be constructed to a minimum of 48 feet, which is doable. Sidewalks need to be installed on Edgewater Drive and East Lincoln Street to provide pedestrian egress, and there are areas in town where sidewalks have been installed around trees and landscaping. Commissioner Krauss pointed out that when the Commission downzoned the surrounding neighborhood to R-1, it was not trying to put people with non-conforming duplexes ahead of those working with the City and the City processes. The Commission was not trying to move illegal units ahead of this project. If illegal duplexes exist, they are currently using sewer capacity; and the Commission blessing their duplexification will not change the sewer system load. Commissioner Krauss stated it is his intention to make sure other applications are not being put ahead of this very legal, very public, and very intense application. The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan plans for development of this area, and the Commission did everything it could, when approving the plan, to note development in this area is permitted. There is a way to develop this property properly, but the applicants need to go through the planned unit development process to get it done. Commissioner Krauss stated he wants all variances to be dealt with as a planned unit development. Commissioner Hietala agreed with Commissioner Krauss's comments, adding there are certain requirements, like sidewalks, that must be met. This area is properly zoned for this number of units, if they are configured differently. This project could be better designed, and he said he is disappointed that this 06-28-04 - 13 - process hadn't yielded a better result. The applicants need to pursue a planned unit development. It was a year ago that this area was reviewed, and an impasse still exists with respect to development or no development of this area. If the transfer of development rights issue or some other means of compensation for property owners is not resolved to prevent takings from occurring, the Commission is going to be faced with other planned unit development proposals. Commissioner Krauss stated he is reluctant, at this point, to say that the only way a landowner can develop a small piece of property, in a way that complies with the City's three planning documents, is to be a big developer. If small developers aren't able to develop, some changes need to be made. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted it is unfortunate this discussion is becoming a rhetorical debate over development rights. He has served on the Commission for over five years, and he has approved developments, even though he hasn't always agreed with them, on every piece of ground he ever played on as a kid. When a development comes forward that is ready to go forward, he will approve it; but this proposal isn't one. Mayor Cetraro stated his agreement with comments made by Commissioner Krauss and Commissioner Hietala. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the Commission approve the variances requested by HKM Engineering, Inc., for Bart and Berit Manion under Application No. 2-04114, from various sections of the Bozeman Municipal Code, as follows: (1) from Section 18.44.010 .A., to not provide a street access arranged to allow suitable development of property to the north; (2) from Section 18.44.010.H., to not provide secondary or emergency access; (3) from Section 18.44.020.A.2., to not meet City street standards without being reviewed as a planned unit development; (4) from Section 18.44.060, to not construct Edgewater Drive and East Lincoln Street as City standard streets; and (5) from Section 18.44.080.A., to not construct sidewalks on Edgewater Drive or East Lincoln Street. The motion failed by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No being Commissioner Youngman and Commissioner Kirchhoff. Public hearina - Site Plan Review - allow construction of four two-household condominium structures. and the condominiumizina of two existina dwellina units on Lot 2. cas No. 203 - HKM Enaineerina. Inc.. for Bart and Berit Manion lEdaewater Condominiums. 425 East Lincoln Street) lZ-04114) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the site plan requested by HKM Engineering, Inc., for Bart and Berit Manion under Application No. 2-04114, to allow the construction of four two-household condominium structures and the condominiumizing of two existing dwelling units on Lot 2, Certificate of Survey No. 203, and a portion of Tract 1, Certificate of Survey No. 1557, Bozeman Creek Annexation. The subject property is commonly known as 425 East Lincoln Street. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. He noted the testimony, both written and oral, and the discussion on the previous item pertain to this item as well. Joby Sabol, representing the applicants, stated they would like to continue this matter in an attempt to redesign the existing application or come forward with a planned unit development application. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the decision on the site plan requested by HKM Engineering, Inc., for Bart and Berit Manion under Application No. 2- 04114, to allow the construction of four two-household condominium structures and the condominiumizing of two existing dwelling units be continued until such time as the applicant brings forth a resubmitted application. 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. 06-28-04 --- -- .-...--- .------.---....... - 14- Break 9:55 - 10:00 pm Mayor Cetraro declared a break from 9:55 pm until 1 0:00 pm in accordance with Commission policy. Work session - Commission discussion re City Manaaer's Budaet Recommendations for Fiscal Year 2004-2005 Acting City Manager Brey reminded the Commissioners that, since the four special improvement districts for North 19th Avenue and Valley Center Road were not created, the $150,000 in administrative fees included in the budget from that source must be removed from the revenues in the General Fund, with the result being that the fund is no longer in balance. He then forwarded staff's recommendation that the General Fund reserves not be depleted any further, but that they be replenished if at all possible. In light of the reduction in revenues, the Acting City Manager suggested the following reductions in expenses: Facilities Superintendent $ 50,000 MPPA - reduced contribution 20,000 Bike lanes 50,000 Leadership training 5,000 $125,000 Plus un budgeted revenues 23.000 $148,000 The Acting City Manager stated the City Commission's budget remains relatively untouched, and includes $1,000 for board requests. He noted that the spay/neuter clinic is also included in the budget, but none of the other requests have been included. He then indicated that the City must provide office space and clerical assistance for the study commission, but the funding for that study was voted down and no monies have been included in the budget for the study commission's operations for this fiscal year. He concluded by reminding the Commission that the amount of big box mitigation monies for housing is $25,000 short of funding this year's commitment to that program. Acting City Manager Brey noted that the Hyalite transmission main is not included in this year's budget, but suggested that impact fees should be considered for a portion of the funding. He stated that, if the City is successful in obtaining federal monies to assist with the project, those fees could serve as the City's match. Also, an increase in rates may be needed to complete the funding package for the project. The Acting City Manager then noted that the back-up generator for the Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building has not been included in the budget; it is his hope that funding for the generator can be obtained from a source outside the general fund. Further, he noted that relocation of the legal department to the Professional Building is not in the budget, although the $40,000 for maintenance could be diverted to that use if necessary. Acting City Manager Brey asked for Commission direction in putting together the final budget for public hearing and possible adoption. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Director of Finance Gamradt stated the monies for park development projects are in a special revenue fund. That fund has a projected balance of $62,000 at the end of this fiscal year and that, when coupled with the $100,000 in the proposed budget, results in $162,000 in monies available for the upcoming year. Commissioner Kirchhoff voiced his support for the cuts recommended by Acting City Manager Brey to bring this budget into balance. He acknowledged that departments have had cuts they didn't want, and he does not believe it is appropriate to begin adding items back into the budget at this time. He noted that the Commissioners are being lobbied to move Ron Dingman into a new permanent Parks Manager position, but he supports the Acting City Manager's recommended cut due to the current budget constraints. Responding to questions from Commissioners, Director of Public Service Arkell stated that, due to the demands on Superintendent of Facilities and Lands Goehrung, particularly with the Story Mansion and parking garage, operation of the Parks Division was temporarily assigned to Ron Dingman. In light of the 06-28-04 .-..---- --..-..---- ..-..-..-.-.- -15- new budget cuts, that temporary situation will bee nded, a nd a II employees will resume their former positions. Acting City Manager Brey stated that every city in Montana is encountering the same problems that Bozeman is facing, particularly in general fund operations. He noted that the State statutes allow for the creation of a park maintenance district which was previously considered but found not popular at the time. He suggested that is an option the Commission may wish to consider again; and he will provide additional information if desired. Commissioner Krauss stated he does not believe that budget decisions have been painful this year, although he anticipates decisions in future years may be. He suggested that some kind of matrix be established to assist staff and Commissioners when that does occur. Commissioner Krauss then suggested that the Commission could choose not to fund or participate in the Montana Public Power Authority (MPPA) at this time, particularly in light of recent bankruptcy court decisions. He noted that the consultants are willing to donate their time while awaiting the court decisions because they believe in this program; and he feels the City should continue to show its interest and support by leaving monies in the budget. Commissioner Youngman voiced her support for leaving the monies in the budget. She then expressed concern about cutting the monies for the bicycle plan, particularly since this is a public safety issue; however, she recognizes there are still some monies available and she hopes a little progress will continue to be made each year in this area. She stressed that next year's budget will be tougher, and the Commission should begin considering ways to ensure that parks development and bike system improvements are funded. Commissioner Krauss suggested that the City retain mowing of the parks and turn the rest of the development and maintenance over to the neighborhoods, particularly for neighborhood parks. Commissioner Krauss voiced his inclination to follow the Acting City Manager's recommendations; however, he would like to establish a priority list for adding dropped items back in if revenues are greater than anticipated. He expressed his regret that GalaVan and relocation to the Professional Building have not been funded. Commissioner Youngman noted that the affordable housing policy requires a $200,000 annual commitment. Since there is only $175,000 available in the big box monies, the Commission must either find another source of funding for the remaining $25,000 or tell the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board that it cannot fully honor its commitment. She then proposed that $25,000 be taken from the other half of the big box monies to fund the affordable housing commitment for this fiscal year. Responding to questions from Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman noted that monies for affordable housing were previously included in the general fund. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted that taking $200,000 out of the general fund annually for this purpose might be excessive. He then suggested the Commission may wish to revisit the housing policy and reduce that amount to $100,000. Doing so would give the City two years of funding in the big box monies and would allow for the commitment of general fund monies to be slowly increased. Commissioner Youngman responded by voicing her preference for budgeting the entire $175,000 in big box monies at this time and cautioning the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board that there may not be any additional monies in the future. Commissioner Krauss expressed his interest in protecting the big box monies that have been designated for economic development, giving the new City Manager an opportunity to determine how they might be best spent. He then suggested that affordable housing should be close to the top of the matrix he had previously proposed. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Krauss stated he is not interested in considering the possible creation of a park maintenance district this year. 06-28-04 - 16- Commissioner Hietala voiced interest in a five-percent across-the-board cut in the general fund, noting that would create a $750,000 reduction in the budget. Acting City Manager Brey responded that $1 million in reductions have already been made from the original amounts requested. Commissioner Krauss stated that he could support a two-percent reduction for a specific purpose, but not the proposed five-percent reduction. He then voiced his support for the two new police officers in the budget, noting they are needed to address traffic safety issues. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Acting City Manager Brey stated he believes it is essential to create a balanced budget for the upcoming fiscal year. He believes a $3 million fund balance is as low as the City should go. He also stressed that care must be taken to not dip into that balance to cover annual operational costs; rather, any drop in the balance should result from a conscious determination to use monies for a one-time expenditure. Acting City Manager Brey noted that one outstanding issue is the possible creation of a project manager position, noting it can be funded from the enterprise funds. A majority of the Commissioners agreed the position should be created. Following Commissioner discussion, the Commissioners generally agreed with all of the revisions that have been made by the Acting City Manager and those identified during this discussion. Authorize Mayor to sian - EmDloyment Aareement with Chris Kukulski. to serve as City Manaaer; continaent uDon Mr. Kukulski's execution of document Included in the Commissioners' packets was a copy of the draft employment agreement with Chris Kukulski to serve as the City Manager. Acting City Manager Brey noted the blanks on the timeframe of the document have now been worked out, and Mr. Kukulski will begin work in Bozeman as soon as possible. The contract language has the phrase "commencement of employment no later than September 1" included throughout. Mr. Kukulski is aware of modifications made to the contract and agrees to those. Acting City Manager Brey noted the City typically requires the other party to sign the contract first; but, in this case, he doesn't see any problem with the City signing this document first and forwarding it on to Mr. Kukulski. Commissioner Hietala questioned the inclusion ofthe housing allowance and provision for relocation expenses. Commissioner Krauss responded that the City couldn't replace the former City Manager with an individual who had a comparable set of skills and experience and expect to pay them a lot less than the former City Manager. The former City Manager was paid a lot more than this, and it wasn't enough to keep him in Bozeman. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted the Commission decided by a majority vote to empower the negotiators to do the best job they could. They did that, and this is the contract they brought back to the Commission. Commissioner Youngman pointed out a lot of these provisions were in the two previous City Manager contracts, and they are standard. She believes Mr. Kukulski is going to be a great City Manager, and she has faith this contract is the best contract that could be negotiated. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Mayor be authorized and directed to execute the Employment Agreement, contingent upon Mr. Kukulski's execution of the document. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, CommissionerYoungman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No being Commissioner Hietala. Discussion - FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. 06-28-04 ----.---..- - 17 - (1) Memo from City Attorney Luwe, dated June 23, providing responses to some of the questions raised during the Commission's June 14 consideration of the request for permission to construct a parking lot for Burke Park. (2) Letter from Bob Loucks, Salmon, Idaho, expressing his displeasure with a parking ticket he received. (3) Letter from the Story Mansion Task Force, dated June 21, forwarding a report on activities undertaken to date. (4) Invitation to attend an open house for Barbara Clawson's retirement on June 29 at the Courthouse. (5) Updated listing of planning projects to be considered at upcoming Commission meetings, dated June 28, 2004. (6) Agenda for the County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 am on Tuesday, June 29, at the Courthouse. (7) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 am on Tuesday, June 29, at the Professional Building. Acting City Manager Brey offered the following FYI items: 1) Included in the Commission packets was a letter from Rolf Groseth, co-chair of the Story Mansion Task Force, advising the Commission of its activities thus far and proposing the task force come forward with a presentation this fall. In this letter, Mr. Groseth has identified a couple of funding sources for preservation assistance; a $500,000 HUD grant and $500,000 from the Department of Interior's Saving America's Treasures program. Acting City Manager Brey noted the HUD grant will be well worth accepting, but the Saving America's Treasures money comes with significant strings attached. 2) Tracy Oulman, Neighborhood Coordinator, has reported that Child Care Connections copied and sent out the City's fireworks ordinance summary to over 300 homes. All but two of the Police Department overtime slots have been filled for stricter enforcement on July 3, 4, and 5. 3) The Commission has received a memo from City Attorney Luwe and Staff Attorney Cooper regarding the status of the alley off of South Wallace Avenue. Staff Attorney Cooper stated he believes he is going to see a big reaction to his memo regarding the alley off of South Wallace Avenue from people living on the alley. Commissioner Youngman agreed, saying the north end of the alley needs to be reopened, but the City will also need to provide south end alley access. Staff Attorney Cooper responded that many of the neighbors were considering asking the City to vacate the alley entirely. Acting City Manager Brey added that, in light of how tight future City budgets will be, it is not uncommon for cities to be paid for vacations. Staff Attorney Cooper noted the following during his FYI: 1) The CALA process is plodding along. The voluntary clean-up plan is ready for closure; the DEQ has reviewed the plan and asked for some changes; but the City is now in a position to ask for closure. It has been recommended the City not ask for closure if it is going forward with the CALA process. An agreement is needed with the owners of the Story property that they would come in and cap their property as well. It has been proposed the City would then buy that property with the first proceeds from the orphan's share. He hopes to have a conference call with the DEQ people later this week. 2) He will be out of the office Thursday, Friday, and next Tuesday. During his FYI, Commissioner Krauss noted the following: 1) The master plan for the parks is going forward. The Tuckerman park problems have been resolved; but there is resistance from the Gardner Park neighbors who do not want a parking lot there, and they believe the covenants might restrain the City from constructing one. Adjournment - 11 :43 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 being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Krauss, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. 06-28-04 ----- - - 18- AND ATTEST: ~y~ ROBIN L. SULLIVAN Clerk of the Commission PREPARED BY: '1i~\L---.J ~~UAj MREN L. DeLA THaW R Deputy Clerk of the Commission 06-28-04 ___._u_____.._ _ - .~