HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-02 Minutes, City Commission
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
February 2, 2004
*****************************
The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal
Building, on Monday, February 2, 2004, at 6:00 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, City
Attorney Paul Luwe, and Deputy Clerk of the Commission DeLathower.
The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence.
None of the Commissioners requested that any of the Consent Items be removed for discussion.
Sianina of Notice of SDecial Meetina
Each of the Commissioners, in turn, signed the Notice of Special Meeting.
Executive session re litiaation strateaies
At 6:06 pm, Mayor Cetraro announced that, pursuant to Section 2-3-203(4)(a), Montana Code
Annotated, and the Montana Supreme Court rulings, he, as presiding officer, has determined that the
discussion of strategy to be followed with respect to litigation in open meeting would have a detrimental
effect on the litigating position of the City. He then called an executive session for the purpose of discussing
litigation strategy and requested that all persons except the Commissioners, City Manager, City Attorney,
Staff Attorney, and the Deputy Clerk leave the room.
At 6:18 pm, Mayor Cetraro closed the executive session and reconvened the open meeting.
Informational Dresentation re unified develoDment ordinance - Associate Planner Saunders
Planning Director Epple reviewed his memo, which was contained in the Commission packets,
noting Planning staff has created and attached to his memo a list of substantial changes in the Unified
Development Ordinance per the Mayor's request. That list is very condensed and only contains changes
that were ranked as new, significant, or substantial.
Associate Planner Saunders reviewed changes to the Unified Development Ordinance, highlighting
the following:
Section 18.42.130, Fences, noting corner side yards now allow a taller fence, 6 foot, beginning at
the rear of the building without requiring a deviation or variance.
Section 18.42.150, Lighting, noting installation of street lights with subdivisions is mandatory, while
installation with zoning projects is optional. All installations must meet standards for pole heights, light
intensity, very limited light spill over is allowed, and addresses street light spacing.
Section 18.42.180, Affordable Housing, noting this provision applies to all subdivisions over five
acres in size, restricted size lots must occupy 10 percent of buildable net acreage, restricted size units have
a floor area ratio cap of 1 :3.3, establishes a subdivision density minimum of six dwellings per net acre, and
allows a lot of flexibility since a combination or single approach to meeting the standard is now available.
Those approaches to meeting this standard include market sales, transfer of lots to the City at a ratio of one
lot for every three lots on the market, and an off-site provision for the same number of restricted size lots.
Section 18.44, Transportation, noting conforming private streets may be permitted without Planned
Unit Development review, while non-60-foot rights-of-way still require Planned Unit Development review.
However, the City will not take over any street that is less than 31 foot. Transportation pathways are
required when specified criteria are met and include sidewalks, trails, and bike lanes.
02-02-04
- 2 -
Three alternatives are now available for required lot frontage to provide lot access and include street
access, street/alley access, and alley access with pedestrian greenway or trail corridor access.
Parking is addressed in Section 18.46, noting residential parking requirements have been revised
for clarity, the required parking modifiers are included in the ordinance, and backing into alleys is allowed
for residential projects.
Section 18.48, Landscaping, has been significantly reworked and the dimensional standards have
been standardized, but the number of points required hasn't changed. Ways to earn landscaping points
include hardscape and site design, water conservation plantings, and flexible plant groups. This section
more clearly sets out the dimensional standards for plants and allows smaller plants in some cases. The
screening widths for parking areas have been reduced, and landscaping of public lands is coordinated
between subdivision and zoning standards.
Section 18.54, Telecommunications, establishes a sliding scale of preference offacility type, revises
definitions and creates a micro-scale broadcast facility option, clarifies standards for approval and
requirements for submittals to establish need, and provides for ridgeline protection along Sourdough Ridge.
Wetlands are addressed in Section 18.56, which establishes a Wetland Review Board. The first
priority is impact avoidance, and this section establishes activities within wetlands that require permitting.
Permits are issued by the Planning Director or City Commission after recommendation by the Wetland
Review Board.
Section 18.58, Flood Hazard, has been relocated and updated. The horizontal and vertical
dimensions that trigger the study requirement have been reduced, and study requirements for streams
draining less than 25 square miles have been added. An option for a waiver of the study, if it can be
demonstrated a study is unnecessary, has been included.
Section 18.74 addresses Improvements, and one chapter now addresses both subdivision and site
development installation of improvements. This section has been restructured to address both City and
developer needs and allows expanded types of securities that may be used to secure improvements.
Concurrent construction options have been expanded, as well.
Interpretive aids, such as illustrations, charts, tip sheets, table of approvals, and flow charts, have
been included; and all aids are non-regulatory.
Associate Planner Saunders then turned his attention to the appeals section found in 18.66.030.
This appeals process has been substantially overhauled and now says the Commission is the de novo
review body. Materials to be considered by the City Commission are those that were available to the
Planning Director including the application materials, review and recommendations by staff or advisory
bodies, public comment, and any other materials that were available or submitted during the processing and
review of the appeal. It now only requires a simple majority of three, rather than four, votes to carry an
appeals decision. One new piece of information that is distinct is that if someone wishes to appeal a
decision, they must prove they are an aggrieved party; i.e. they will be injured by the original decision. An
aggrieved party is defined in Chapter 80.
Minutes. Januarv 20 and Januarv 26. 2004
It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the minutes
of the meetings of January 20 and January 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.
Consent Items
Acting City Manager Brey presented to the Commission the following Consent Items.
Commission Resolution No. 3653 . adoptina the ICMA Retirement Corporation's
VantaaeCare Retirement Health Savinas Proaram
02-02-04
------- - ,,,- .-...----
- 3 -
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3653
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA,
ADOPTING THE ICMA RETIREMENT CORPORATION'S VANTAGECARE RETIREMENT
HEALTH SAVINGS PROGRAM.
Approval of final plat for Lewis and Clark Commercial Subdivision - subdivide 33.415
acres located in the SW% a nd N W%. Section 36. T 1 S. R 6E. M PM. into 8
industrial lots ( alona north side of Baxter Lane. east of Simmental Way)
(P-03047)
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
Mark Haggerty, 308 South 5th Avenue, stated he wishes to address the issue of impact fees. He
said that when the original fee study was completed, the hired consultant cut the fees in half as a "fudge
factor". Consequently, the fee the city now levees is only half of the true impact fee. He recognized it is
more and more difficult to get federal or state money for infrastructure improvements and local services,
and he is worried that impact fees will be the next to fall. He stated he wants to make sure this Commission
recognizes the importance of providing public services; and, hopefully, they will stay the course.
Ron Newman, 4050 West Babcock Street, also addressed impact fees, from the perspective of
voters. He said that if, in fact, the voters have approved this measure only to be undermined by elected
officials, it would be very discouraging. He encouraged public discussion, without aspersion, to bring things
out into open.
Henry Shovic, 19 Hill Street, voiced his unequivocal support for impact fees. He characterized
impact fees as a necessity that may be unfair to the few, but necessary for the many.
Appellate hearina - administrative decision on Certificate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of
existina sinale-household residence and construction of a new sinale-household residence on Lots
5 and 6. Block 2. Babcock-Davis Addition (212 North Church Avenue) (C-03005)
This was the time and place set for the appeal filed by Tannis and Merle Adams under Application
No. C-03005, on the administrative approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of the
existing single-household residence and construction of a new single-household residence on Lots 5 and
6, Block 2, Babcock-Davis Addition. The subject property is owned by Lark and Gartz Gould and is located
at 212 North Church Avenue.
Mayor Cetraro opened the appellate hearing.
Assistant Planner Kozub presented the staff report. She reviewed this appellate hearing, saying it
is an appeal of an administrative project decision, seeking to overturn the original decision to allow
construction of a new single-family residence. The proposed new residence will replace the existing
residence, which was built in 1889. Assistant Planner Kozub provided a brief history of this appeal, noting
that when this application was originally submitted, Planning staff, including the Historic Preservation
Planner, questioned its compliance with the subjective standards for a Certificate of Appropriateness. While
it is a quality design, staff questioned whether it is appropriate for the North Church Avenue neighborhood.
Therefore, staff asked the Design Review Board for informal advice to help determine if this project would
be an appropriate addition to the North Church Avenue neighborhood. This North Church Avenue
neighborhood has been studied and is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. Three
members of the Design Review Board discussed the application and determined it would be an appropriate
02-02-04
-- ----
--------
-4-
addition to the North Church Avenue neighborhood. Subsequently, the Planning Office approved the
requested Certificate of Appropriateness with two conditions. The Assistant Planner stated that following
that decision, Merle and Tannis Adams, who live directly north of the subject property, filed an appeal based
on the arguments of lack of neighborhood compatibility, decrease in property values due to loss of winter
sunlight, and setting an anti-affordable housing precedent in a neighborhood which has historically been
characterized as a "working class neighborhood". A facilitated land-use mediation session was held, but
no compromise or agreement was reached. Assistant Planner Kozub noted that at its January 13th meeting,
the Design Review Board voted to recommend denial of the appeal, upholding the decision to approve the
project.
Merle Adams, 216 North Church A venue and appellant, stated he has demonstrated his commitment
to this neighborhood, noting that two years ago the alley house he renovated received an Historic
Preservation Award. He said he has no objections to a new house next door, but this isn't the right house.
Mr. Adams said he is disappointed with this process because initially Planning staff said this house wasn't
appropriate for this neighborhood because of incompatibility of height, proportions of doors and windows,
relationship of building mass, roof shape and scale, architectural detail, color, and materials. Durin~ the
initial Design Review Board meeting, Mr. Adams stated, he was not allowed to speak. Then he spent 180
to appeal the decision to allow construction of this house, which allowed him to then go to another Design
Review Board meeting. In response to Design Review Board members' comments dismissing the notion
there would be sun blockage, Mr. Adams said he commissioned a sun angle study. The results of that study
were included in the Commission packets. The sun angle study shows the Adams' are going to experience
sun blockage for two months, with extensive shadow for another month. Mr. Adams said that since the
Design Review Board mentioned the issue of sunlight numerous times, he believes they considered it an
important element to be considered. However, members ofthe Design Review Board did not believe there
was going to be a sun blockage problem, but this study clearly demonstrates otherwise. Mr. Adams noted
they added onto their home in an effort to bring sun into their house, so the fact that this proposed house
is so tall and broad will negatively affect their house. Mr. Adams closed by saying he and others in this
historic neighborhood have always found ways to work with City Planning staff and come to an agreement
on something that is appropriate for the neighborhood, and he asks that the Goulds be required to do the
same.
Velma McMeekin, 425 East Cottonwood Street, said she was here to speak in support of the appeal
filed by the Adams'. She has done her research, including looking at the house the Goulds patterned their
house after at 414 South Third Street and walking around the site at 212 North Church Avenue; and this
house isn't appropriate on this site in the northeast neighborhood. Because this site is in the Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay District, development on this property must be in keeping with the existing homes;
and Planning staff initially found this house isn't in keeping with the existing neighborhood homes. Ms.
McMeekin pointed out the individuals on the Design Review Board who offered their support of the Gould's
house don't live in the north end of town; they live on the south side where homes tend to be larger and
more in keeping with this type of house. She characterized homes in the northeast neighborhood as smaller
and less ostentatious. Ms. McMeekin closed by asking the Commission to support the Adams' appeal.
Lark Gould, applicant, said she wants to point out that the City Planning Department has approved
this project upon recommendation from the Design Review Board, which was created to provide feedback
to the Commission and Planning staff. Ms. Gould added they have spent a lot of time thinking about the
design and looking at City handouts to make sure they have a project that meets City standards. They are
not requesting any deviations or variances; this house is within the established setbacks. Ms. Gould said
they are offended that people believe they should be building this house design in another area of town.
Pete Stein, architect for the Goulds, distributed a handout containing a picture of the model of this
project and copies of pages from the Certificate of Appropriateness brochure prepared by the Planning
Department. Mr. Stein noted this is the brochure they used to guide the design of this project, and they have
followed the recommendations outlined in the brochure. He showed drawings of the original project as
proposed, noting they have made adjustments to make this house the same height as the neighbors'
houses. Mr. Stein pointed out that both neighbors currently violate City setbacks, and the Adams' current
building throws shadows onto the very windows they have expressed concern about. There is also a long
wall and a grove of spruce trees that throw shadows. This project meets all criteria, and they are not asking
for any deviations.
Responding to Commissioner Krauss, Mr. Stein acknowledged the original design was taller, which
would have cast a bigger shadow. He pointed out this house is set back farther from the street than either
02-02-04
----.--- -----
.... ___._n_._.__ ----....".
- 5 -
neighboring house; and it isn't going to present as a huge, imposing building, particularly with nice
landscaping.
Responding to an inquiry from Commissioner Youngman, Mr. Stein indicated the total square
footage of this dwelling is 2,756 square feet.
Dave Chambers, 224 North Church Avenue, stated he has two concerns; one of which is factual and
one that is procedural. His factual concern centers on the Planning Department and Historic Preservation
Officer's letter to the Goulds listing concerns raised at the Planning Department staff meeting. However,
the Design Review Board's minutes of their January 13, 2004 meeting, where they considered this issue,
contain no response to any of the listed concerns. They did, though, include Planning Department's
approval of the project, following Design Review Board's recommendation, with no required changes in the
project. Mr. Chambers said he isn't sure why the City employs staff, if applicants and Boards aren't going
to listen to their concerns.
Mr. Chambers said his procedural concerns stem from the fact that he submitted a letter to the
Design Review Board for their consideration when reviewing this project, but it wasn't delivered until the
beginning of the meeting; and he doesn't believe they had time to give his letter proper consideration. And,
again, there was no response to his concerns contained in the Design Review Board's minutes. The
message this sends to him is the next time he goes before the Board, he shouldn't have to listen to them
because the Design Review Board doesn't believe historic preservation guidelines are important. Mr.
Chambers closed by saying he believes there are different guidelines for homeowners from those for
architects.
Jon Gerster, 719 North Wallace Avenue, displayed photos showing the North Church Avenue
neighborhood. He said the Northeast Neighborhood Association didn't know about this issue until the past
few weeks because the homeowners were trying to handle this themselves. They came to the
Neighborhood Association for help when they felt they weren't being heard. Mr. Gerster conducted a
pictorial tour of the North Church Avenue neighborhood, noting that over the last seven or eight years there
has been a lot of remodeling done; and all of those people have shown great concern for the homes and
the history and heritage of the neighborhood. Naturally, they became disturbed and alarmed when they
heard someone was wanting to move into the neighborhood to the ire of all those around them. The reason
for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District is to keep the character of the neighborhood intact. The
northeast neighborhood expects a win/win solution from this, even though no compromise was reached at
the land-use facilitation. They are concerned this will be a win for the Goulds and a loss for the street, which
has had lots of wins and reasons for celebration. The Northeast Neighborhood Association is asking the
Commission to have the Goulds proceed with due diligence and reach a compromise.
Bruno Georgeton, 210 North Church Avenue, noted the proposed Gould house will be as wide as
the Alliance Fellowship Church, referring to the picture provided. He then read from a letter his wife had
written in opposition to the Gould project, saying they hope the Commission will give close consideration
to this appeal. In approving such a house that is out of character with the neighborhood, due to its opposing
size and mass, the Commission will be setting a precedent for the removal of older, smaller houses. This
is the only semi-affordable area left in Bozeman and is a working class neighborhood comprised of small
homes. Mr. Georgeton asked the Commissioners to consider the effect of such a huge house on others
property taxes and the resulting increased rates paid by renters in this neighborhood.
Walker Smith, 211 North Church Avenue, said his concern is with the Design Review Board and its
process. He said he has lived at a number of addresses in this neighborhood and has improved those
properties in conjunction with Planning staff's direction. As a reward for his diligence, he received an
Historic Preservation Award. Mr. Smith stated that had he come in with his own ideas, pushed through, and
ignored the suggestions of staff and the Design Review Board, he could have had what he really wanted;
larger windows, larger rooms, and more profit from the resale of the property. Mr. Smith said the point is
the Design Review Board process is flawed and is taking advantage of the small homeowners who listen;
it is big business, as usual.
Chris Nixon, 719 North Wallace Avenue, said he could support the Goulds' house if it were built in
a new subdivision in town, but it isn't appropriate in an historic neighborhood. While North Church Avenue
isn't totally pristine, people on the north side have recently begun to realize their residences have intrinsic
value. They have remodeled their homes in keeping with the historic character of this neighborhood and
have gone to great lengths to protect that character. By approving the Goulds' project, the City will risk
02-02-04
-..---- -....----.-
--- .. -..-----.- _.___..._n.._..._.....
- 6 -
losing continuity in the community. There will never be any reason for people to "come home" because the
neighborhoods and homes will all be alike. Mr. Nixon said he, too, is concerned that by granting approval
forthis project, the City will start a trend toward removing small, older homes and replacing them with larger,
more expensive houses. He believes the historic part of Bozeman should be honored, and these types of
massive homes should be built in "new Bozeman".
Tom Noble, 401 North Church Avenue, spoke regarding the scale of this proposed house. He said
his house is currently the largest on the street, and his house is just over 1800 square feet. He pointed out
this proposed house is one-third bigger than his; and in addition, it's being built on a very small lot. Mr.
Noble closed by stating the visual impact of this house is going to be grave.
Sherm Janke, 803 North 17th Avenue, said he was speaking in support of the Adams' appeal and
advised the Commission to think in future terms. He said he thinks now is the time to plant the idea that
everyone should be guaranteed the right to the sun for three reasons: 1) more photogenic rays on roof tops
will help ease the energy crisis; 2) the goal of energy conservation is to have maximum exposure to daylight
and homes need to be designed in that way; 3) to ease the psychological aspect of Seasonal Affective
Disorder, which is a bona fide disease that affects 25 percent of the population, and the farther north one
lives the more serious it is and the more incidences there are.
Dane Gamble, 13 Hitching Post Road, said he lived on the northeast side a long time ago, and it
hasn't changed a whole lot. He acknowledged this is a difficult decision before the Commission; one that
will affect everyone in some respect. He pointed out the Story Mansion isn't compatible with its surrounding
homes, and the City owns it. He noted one of the City's goals is to integrate homes in Bozeman and asked
if this is integrating. Mr. Gamble closed by saying he hopes all parties can come to an amicable solution
to this situation.
Pete Stein stated that, in regard to the elevation as viewed from the side, the neighbors' property
isn't much different. He pointed out the neighboring wall is huge and that, combined with the spruce forest
there, doesn't allow sunlight in now. He reiterated that the Adams' own building is throwing shade on their
house right now.
Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the appellate hearing.
Commissioner Kirchhoff stated that initially he thought this was a tastefully and nicely designed
house that would be aligned with the streetscape, but others' arguments now make sense to him. The
architect has been mindful of the City's requirements when designing this house, but one cannot design a
home in a vacuum. The City has been talking about integrating neighborhoods with a mix of housing types,
but that usually means smaller structures next to larger ones. Those are generally opposed because of
property owners' fears the smaller houses will lower the property values of the larger houses.
Commissioner Kirchhoff said he buys the argument that this neighborhood does have its own character,
which is subjective; but, objectively this project meets all requirements. This project is causing controversy
because the City's zoning guidelines aren't doing their job in this instance, and the City's Historic Planner
has concerns about this project, as well. Commissioner Kirchhoff said this house, as proposed, would be
disruptive to the neighborhood character; and he hopes there is some room for scaling this project down.
Commissioner Krauss noted it is hard to make a decision based solely on size. It can be argued
the City needs affordable homes in this neighborhood, but it is hard to argue there shouldn't be larger, more
affluent homes in an affordable area. Commissioner Krauss stated his biggest concern is there are
ordinances and processes in place, and there is nothing in the ordinance requiring square foot equivalency.
This house is designed to be built without variances or deviations, and the applicant and architect went to
great lengths to build something within the established guidelines. This house meets the requirements of
infill in the downtown, rather than sprawling into the suburbs. Commissioner Krauss said the denial of this
project isn't linked to a specific part of the ordinance, which is critical for him to overturn the original
decision.
Commissioner Youngman noted the subjective regulatory standards for a Certificate of
Appropriateness are outlined in Section 18.28.050, as outlined in the staff report. The Commission does
support integrating variety in the size of buildings, design, roof shape and scale, and architectural detail; but
this project is harmful to the neighboring properties. Staff acknowledges this application meets objective
standards, but they questioned the subjective. It appears this project doesn't meet the neighborhood
compatibility standards outlined in Section 18.28.050 of height, proportions of doors and windows,
02-02-04
.-.--.-...-.--- - -. ---- .....--.---
- 7 -
relationship of building masses and spaces, roof shape and scale, directional expression, architectural
detail, color, and materials.
Commissioner Youngman stated the fundamental evaluation of neighborhood compatibility is the
hardest decision for the Commission to make. The North Church Avenue neighborhood may be declared
an historic district, and this house doesn't fit in with that declaration. The proposed house is four times
larger than the current structure built in 1889; and although it doesn't look historic any more, the original
house is historic because of how little it is. Bulkification isn't specifically addressed in the ordinance, but
the Commission needs to consider what is too big to provide constructive diversity when losing the
remaining little home in the neighborhood that is part of the diversity because of its size. Commissioner
Youngman said she isn't saying a large home is undesirable, just not in this neighborhood. She said she
hasn't seen the concerns of either Planning staff or the Historic Preservation Planner addressed, and those
concerns haven't gone away. She would also like to see more effort put into reaching a compromise. If the
City is going to preserve the diverse fabric of this neighborhood, there must be a way to reach a
compromise.
Commissioner Krauss responded the Goulds have come part way toward a compromise by making
changes to their original plan, and now there needs to be something given by the other side.
Commissioner Kirchhoff noted the proposed house is 30 to 40 percent larger than the neighboring
homes, and the City needs to try to find places where people can still be small.
It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, to approve the
appeal filed by Tannis and Merle Adams under Application No C-03005 of administrative decision on
Certificate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of the existing single-household residence and
construction of a new single-household residence on Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Babcock-Davis Addition, and
to ask the applicants to redesign a home that is more compatible in mass and character with the
neighborhood.
Commissioner Krauss suggested the Commission try to find a compromise more in the middle. He
pointed out there are no ordinances regarding average size, and size isn't a criteria for approval or denial
of a project.
Commissioner Kirchhoff responded staff has articulated their concerns, and there has been no
response to those concerns. Compatibility is a real issue, and there is concern the character of the
neighborhood will be negatively altered. Also there is concern other smaller homes could be torn down and
replaced with larger ones. Commissioner Kirchhoff said he still prefers a redesign for a smaller home.
City Attorney Luwe clarified that Commissioner Kirchhoff has put a motion on the table to grant the
appeal, so the applicants will have to redesign their house or the project is dead. To vote in favor of this
motion is to vote in favor of the appellant; if the motion fails, the applicants can build their house.
The motion failed by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff
and Commissioner Youngman; those voting No being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, and
Mayor Cetraro.
Break - 8:27 to 8:35 pm
Mayor Cetraro declared a break from 8:27 pm to 8:35 pm, in accordance with Commission policy.
Appellate hearina (continued) - administrative decision on Certificate of Appropriateness to allow
demolition of existina sinale-household residence and construction of a new sinale-household
residence on Lots 5 and 6. Block 2. Babcock-Davis Addition (212 North Church Avenue) (C-03005)
It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the
Commission reconsider its previous action on this agenda item. 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 being Mayor Cetraro.
02-02-04
-.---.-.---
- 8-
Commissioner Krauss said he didn't believe the Commission had gone far enough to find a
compromise position on this issue. He urged the applicant, as one of the Commissioners who supported
them, to give serious consideration to reducing the width of the house by an amount they feel would be
appropriate.
It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the appeal filed
by Tannis and Merle Adams under Application No C-03005, of the administrative decision on the Certificate
of Appropriateness to allow demolition of the existing single-household residence and construction of a new
single-household residence on Lots 5 and 6, Block 2, Babcock-Davis Addition be denied and that approval
of the original application be subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to construction, the applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required
fees within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall
become null and void.
2. This project shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of
Appropriateness 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 Planning Office prior to
undertaking said modifications, as required by Section 18.62.040 of the Bozeman
Municipal Code.
3. That applicants reduce the width of the single-household residence by a significant
amount, an amount that they find appropriate, in order to create more space to the
north to improve the solar gain of the neighbors to the north.
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.
Public hearina - Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness to allow demolition of existing aaraae
and construction of new 480-sauare-foot aaraae and dwellina unit on Lots 1 and 2. Block 47. Park
Addition. with multiple deviations - Edwin Enaler for Mike Moore. 703 South 5th Avenue (Z-03295)
This was the time and place set for the pUblic hearing on. the Site Plan and Certificate of
Appropriateness, requested by Edwin Engler for Mike Moore under Application No. Z-03297, to allow the
demolition of an existing garage and construction of a new 480-square-foot garage and dwelling unit on Lots
1 and 2, Block 47, Park Addition, with deviations from various provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code,
as follows: (1) from Section 18.16.040, to allow two detached dwelling units on a 3,000-square-foot lot,
rather than the required 10,000-square-foot lot; (2) from Section 18.16.050.A., to allow shed roof to
encroach four feet into required five-foot side yard setback; (3) from Section 18.16.050.A., to allow a vehicle
entrance to be closer than 20 feet to a property line; (4) from Section 18.38.050.E., to allow height of an
accessory structure to exceed the principal building by 1},; feet; (5) from Section 18.46.020A., to allow three
parking spaces to be less than required 20 feet; (6) from Section 18.46.020.K., to allow on-site parking stall
to potentially protrude over rear property line; (7) from Section 18.46.020, to allow two parking spaces to
have backing distance less than required 26 feet; and (8) from Section 18.46.040, to allow three less parking
spaces than required. The subject property is located at 703 South 5th Avenue.
Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing.
Assistant Planner Kozub presented the staff report. She reviewed this application, noting this
property is within a neighborhood conservation overlay district and requires eight deviations, as outlined in
the staff report. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the established criteria and recommends
conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings can be found in the staff report. Assistant Planner
Kozub stated staff and the Development Review Committee believe this project could have a negative
impact on the neighborhood because of parking issues. Therefore, staff does not believe condition number
1 is unreasonable. Planning staff has received letters both in support of, and in opposition to, this proposal,
and those in opposition have primarily been because of parking concerns.
02-02-04
-------------- --------- - ------- - -- ---- -------------- ....-.-.-----.-
- 9 -
Edwin Engler, Gallatin Gateway, stated they have tried hard to design a project that is compatible
with the existing fabric of the neighborhood, which is a key desire of the City. They have also tried to
conform with the existing alleyscape. Some may construe this unit as too small, and it is barely bigger than
what is currently there. This alley is difficult, at best, to gain the required setbacks regarding the parking
requirements; and it is constricted by several factors, including the neighboring property and the overhead
power lines. Mr. Engler pointed out this corner lot does allow for more on-street parking.
Kay McAllister, 606 South 5th Avenue, said she is a Southside Park volunteer; and the street
congestion is a problem. Small children use this park and more cars parked on the streets will create more
danger for these small children. It is much too dangerous to approve anything in this neighborhood without
requiring adequate off-street parking.
Amy Burk, 616 South 5th Avenue, stated her concerns are consistent with Ms. McAllister's. There
is no available parking on the street now because there are so many rentals, some of which have four to
six cars per house. Ms. Burk said they are moving out of this neighborhood because of the rental parties
and concerns with the traffic. She asked the Commission to consider the children of the neighborhood and
the lack of parking in this neighborhood when making their decision.
Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the Site Plan and
Certificate of Appropriateness, requested by Edwin Engler for Mike Moore under Application No. 2-03297,
to allow the demolition of an existing garage and construction of a new 480-square-foot garage and dwelling
unit on Lots 1 and 2, Block 47, Park Addition, with deviations from various provisions of the Bozeman
Municipal Code, as follows: (1) from Section 18.16.040, to allow two detached dwelling units on a 3,000-
square-foot lot, rather than the required 10,000-square-foot lot; (2) from Section 18.16.050.A., to allow shed
roof to encroach four feet into required five-foot side yard setback; (3) from Section 18.16.050.A., to allow
a vehicle entrance to be closer than 20 feet to a property line; (4) from Section 18.38.050.E., to allow height
of an accessory structure to exceed the principal building by 1 ~ feet; (5) from Section 18.46.020A., to allow
three parking spaces to be less than required 20 feet; (6) from Section 18.46.020.K., to allow on-site parking
stall to potentially protrude over rear property line; (7) from Section 18.46.020, to allow two parking spaces
to have backing distance less than required 26 feet; and (8) from Section 18.46.040, to allow three less
parking spaces than required, be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The final site plan shall depict the proposed garage/dwelling unit four additional feet
to the east.
2. Prior to final site plan approval, t he applicant shall provide a color palette and
sample materials board for review and approval by the Planning Office.
3. Per Section 18.48.050.E, street trees shall be provided within the right-of-way at one
tree per 50 linear feet of street frontage along West Alderson Street. Street trees
require a permit (available at the Building Division) from the Bozeman Forestry
Department.
4. Seven (7) copies of the final site plan containing all of the conditions, corrections
and modifications approved by the City Commission shall be submitted for review
and approval by the Planning Director within six months of the date of City
Commission approval.
5. A building permit must be obtained prior to the work and must be obtained within
one year of final site plan approval. Building permits will not be issued until the final
site plan is approved. Minor site surface preparation and normal maintenance shall
be allowed prior to submittal and approval of the final site plan, including excavation
and footing preparation, but NO CONCRETE MAY BE POURED UNTIL A
BUILDING PERMIT IS OBTAINED.
6. This project shall be constructed as approved and conditioned in the Certificate of
Appropriateness application. Any modifications to the submitted and approved
drawing shall invalidate the project's approval unless the applicant submits the
proposed modifications for review and approval by the Planning Office prior to
02-02-04
- 10 -
undertaking said modifications, as required by Section 18.64.110 of the Unified
Development Ordinance.
7. The final site plan shall be adequately dimensioned. A complete legend of all line
types used shall also be provided.
8. Sewer and water services shall be shown on the final site plan and approved by the
Water/Sewer Superintendent. City of Bozeman applications for service shall be
completed by the applicant.
9. Sewer service for the proposed garage-studio apartment shall be separate from the
existing residence.
10. Backflow protection shall be installed on the existing water service line if it hasn't
already been done.
Commissioner Kirchhoff announced he is a neighbor of Mr. Moore's, living about a block and a half
away, and he has heard about this project and comments regarding Planning staff and the process.
City Attorney Luwe added Commissioner Kirchhoff did check with one of the staff attorneys, and the
Legal Department does not believe this is a conflict of interest.
Commissioner Kirchhoff stated this property is located in the university parking district, and there
won't be more congestion on the street because of one dwelling unit. Mr. Moore frequently works out of the
country, and he wants to create a space he can come back to. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted that because
there are deviations requested, it doesn't make this a bad project. There are vehicles parked on the garage
apron now and there has been for very many years. This is a small lot, and they will lose their livable
outdoor space if they move the proposed garage an additional four feet to the east. Therefore, he
suggested amending the motion to eliminate staff condition number 1 , which requires moving the proposed
garage/dwelling unit four additional feet to the east.
Commissioner Krauss responded that lacking three parking spaces is unreasonable to him, and he
won't vote to approve this project if condition number 1 is eliminated.
Commissioner Kirchhoff pointed out the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan calls for maximizing land
use by having more people per acre. The concern is City staff won't be able to pick up garbage if cars are
protruding into the alley. The neighbor has a garage with a vehicle protruding into the alley now, and there
is no problem.
Commissioner Youngman suggested improving safety and still preserve a part of the applicant's
yard by splitting the difference and requiring the garage to be moved two feet to the east.
Commissioner Krauss noted both staff and the Development Review Committee strongly advised
this condition; and if it is altered, he will withdraw his second.
Commissioner Youngman reiterated staff's recommendation is for a parking space length of 20 feet;
and Commissioner Kirchhoff is proposing 16 feet, which is consistent with other garages on the alley. She
brought up the possibility of 18 feet as a compromise, which would allow a vehicle to be parked on the apron
without sticking out into the alley, and still allow some yard space to remain.
The original motion to approve the Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness, requested by Edwin
Engler for Mike Moore under Application No. Z-03297, with deviations and condition as listed above, then
carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner
Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, Commissioner Krauss.
02-02-04
-.---- -----.-------.
- 11 -
Continued Dublic hearina - Dreliminarv Dlat for Gallatin Center. Phase IV. Planned Unit Subdivision -
subdivide 48.73::!: acres described as Lot 3. Minor Subdivision No. 210. into 9 commercial lots. with
variance from Section 16.14.170. to allow reduction in stream bank setback alona a Dortion of East
Catron Creek - Allied Enaineerina for Gallatin Center Limited PartnershiD and PO'S Montaomerv
(P-03038)
This was the time and place set for the continued public hearing on the preliminary plat for Gallatin
Center, Phase IV, Planned Unit Subdivision, as requested by Allied Engineering for Gallatin Center Limited
Partnership and PO'B Montgomery under Application No. P-03038, to subdivide 48.73:t acres described
as Lot 3, Minor Subdivision No. 210, into 9 commercial lots, with a variance from Section 16.14.170 of the
Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow reduction in the streambank setback along a portion of East Catron
Creek. The subject property is located between North 19th Avenue and North 27th Avenue, between Baxter
Lane and Catron Street. It is more specifically located immediately south of PetsMart and the Border's/
Michaels/Ross multi-tenant complex.
Mayor Cetraro reopened the continued public hearing.
Senior Planner Skelton presented the staff report. He reviewed this application, noting this phase
of development bisects the entire Planned Unit Development for this subdivision. Staff has reviewed this
application in light of the established criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive
findings can be found in the staff report. This application is to subdivide approximately 49 acres into nine
commercial lots as the fourth phase of development. Senior Planner Skelton noted the applicants propose
to relocate West Catron Creek to place it along the western boundary of the property, but they do not
propose to relocate East Catron Creek. A variance is required to encroach into the 50-foot watercourse
setback. Staff has reviewed that request and recommends the variance be granted with a condition that
the variance be granted for the west side only, but not the east side. The Planning Board resolution does
not have a condition included to address this variance, that is found in staff's memo to the Commission.
Senior Planner Skelton noted that the Planning Board recommended that before West Catron Creek
is relocated, the subdivider provide the Planning Office with Section 310 and Section 404 permits. The
Section 310 permit has been received, and it is believed the Section 404 permit will be forthcoming. There
has also been a lot of discussion regarding the trail system on this property. Currently there is a trail behind
Target and Costco that goes nowhere, and there is concern with how to continue this trail to the south to
link up with other trails. Therefore, staff recommends condition 13, item 2, be modified to read as follows:
"that the trail running south through Phase IV should be situated along the east side of the watercourse
starting at least 170 feet north of Cattail Street, unless otherwise approved by the Planning Office".
Senior Planner Skelton referred to condition number 25, noting this is an attempt to upgrade the
protective covenants and bylaws for upkeep of the watercourses bisecting this property. However, these
changes would not affect covenants currently in effect for the existing three phases.
Senior Planner Skelton reminded the Commissioners there are two parts to this item; the
watercourse setback variance and the preliminary plat approval.
Chris Budeski, Allied Engineering, noted this is a previously approved subdivision, and they are
back now because time ran out on that approval. The request to relocate East Catron Creek to comply with
the 50-foot watercourse setback did go to the Gallatin Conservation District, but it was denied. The
Conservation District felt that was not appropriate at this time because the stream has been reconstructed
and is well stabilized. Therefore, they are proposing to move West Catron Creek only, and they do have
the Section 310 permit for that. The request for a Section 404 permit is in Helena and is currently being
reviewed. They do not anticipate any problems with that.
Director of Public Service Arkell noted conditions 9 and 10 on the Planning Board's resolution aren't
conditions the developer can make happen; they are advisory for construction on the individual lots. She
proposed adding the following to the end of condition 9: "No building permits will be issued until the North
19tti/Valley Center Road construction contract is awarded, and then on a case by case basis to ensure
concurrent construction ofthe street project and the site project will not negatively impact the public
safety and to ensure alternate routes are acceptable.".
Mr. Budeski stated those conditions are acceptable, and it is prudent to make sure the construction
on these lots and the North 19th/Valley Center construction don't conflict.
02-02-04
--------.-.-- -
- 12 -
Since there were no objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the variance
from Section 16.14.170 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow reduction in the streambank setback along
a portion of East Catron Creek, as requested by Allied Engineering for Gallatin Center Limited Partnership
and PO'B Montgomery under Application No. P-03038, be approved subject to the following condition:
1. That the applicant maintain the 50-foot watercourse setback along the east side of
East Catron Creek with further development of said property, and that it be noted
accordingly on the final plat and in the protective covenants, for review and approval
by the Planning Office prior to final plat approval.
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.
It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the
preliminary plat for Gallatin Center, Phase IV, Planned Unit Subdivision, as requested by Allied Engineering
for Gallatin Center Limited Partnership and PO'B Montgomery under Application No. P-03038, to subdivide
48.73:1: acres described as Lot 3, Minor Subdivision No. 210, into 9 commercial lots, be approved subject
to the following conditions:
1. Stormwater Master Plan:
A 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 must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer.
The master plan must depict the maximum-sized retention basin location, show
location of and provide easements for adequate drainage ways within the
subdivision to transport runoff to the stormwater receiving channel. The plan shall
include sufficient site grading and elevation information (particularly for the basin
site, drainage ways and finished lot grades), typical stormwater detention/retention
basin and discharge structure details, basin sizing calculations and a stormwater
maintenance plan.
Any stormwater ponds located within a park or open space shall be designed and
constructed to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the open space.
Stormwater ponds for runoff generated by the subdivision (e.g., general lot
runoff, public or private streets, common open space, parks, etc.) shall not be
located on easements within privately owned lots.
While the runoff from the individual lots will be dependent on the intensity of use on
each lot, the maximum sizing of the storm retention facilities for each lot will be
established based on maximum site development. Final facility sizing may be
reviewed and reduced during design review of the final site plan for each lot.
The final approved stormwater master plan for the subdivision only covered the
property from Cattail Street north. The report for the remainder of the property never
went beyond the preliminary stages. A stormwater report must be submitted for this
phase of the development, and all stormwater facilities needed to serve the
subdivision infrastructure must be installed with the rest of the improvements for the
subdivision.
2. Plans and specifications and a detailed design report for water and sewer main
extensions, storm sewer and the public street, prepared by a professional engineer,
shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer and the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality. The applicant shall also provide professional
engineering services for cdnstruction inspection, post-construction certification, and
preparation of mylar record drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the
02-02-04
----- . . -.-------
- 13 -
public infrastructure improvements until the plans and specifications have been
approved and a pre-construction conference has been conducted.
No building permits shall be issued prior to substantial completion and City
acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements.
3. All infrastructure improvements including 1) water and sewer main extensions, and
2) public streets, curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting parks, open space, rear yard
frontages or other non-lot frontages, and related storm drainage infrastructure
improvements shall be financially guaranteed or constructed prior to final plat
approval.
City standard residential sidewalks shall be constructed on all public street frontages
of a property prior to occupancy of any structure on the property. Upon the third
anniversary of the plat recordation of any phase of the subdivision, any lot owner
who has not constructed said sidewalk shall, without further notice, construct within
30 days said sidewalk for their lot(s), regardless of whether other improvements
have been made upon the lot. This condition shall be included on the plat and in the
covenants for the subdivision.
4. The location of existing water and sewer mains shall be properly depicted. Proposed
main extensions shall be noted as proposed.
5. The Montana 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 final site plan approval.
6. Easements for the water and sewer main extensions shall be a minimum of 30 feet
in width, with the utility located in the center of the easement. In no case shall the
utility be less than 10 feet from the edge of easement.
7. Project phasing shall be clearly defined including installation of infrastructure.
8. The developer shall make arrangements with the City Engineer's office to provide
addresses for all individual lots in the subdivision prior to filing of the final plat.
9. Site plans for development on the individual lots will not be reviewed until the plans
for the North 19th AvenueNalley Center Road improvements project have been
approved by MDT and the City of Bozeman. No building permits will be issued until
the North 19th AvenueNalley Center Road construction contract is awarded, and
then on a case by case basis to ensure concurrent construction of the street project
and the site project will not negatively impact the public safety and to ensure
alternate routes are acceptable.
10. If construction of the proposed development conflicts with the North 19th Avenue/
Valley Center Road construction, the development's construction activity shall be
suspended at the City's or MDT's discretion.
11. North 27th Avenue/Thomas Lane will be required to be improved to one half a
collector standard as shown in the Transportation Plan including curb, gutter, and
sidewalk. A minimum 24-foot wide driving surface shall be provided to
accommodate two-way traffic until the west half is built. This shall be constructed
from Cattail Street to the southern boundary of this subdivision with Phase II of the
subdivision. A temporary gravel cul-de-sac shall be installed on the southern end of
the street extension.
12. One foot no-access strips shall be dedicated the required distance from all
intersections to make future driveways on all lots comply with the zone code.
02-02-04
_n___...______ . ------ .--------
--.-..-..------.-..--
- 14-
13. That with development of Gallatin Center Subdivision P.U.D. the subdivider: 1)
install the public trail within the West Catron Creek trail/stream corridor as an 8-foot
wide asphalt surface with the proper specifications determined by City staff, 2) that
the trail running south through Phase IV should be situated along the east side of
the watercourse starting at least 170 feet north of Cattail Street, unless otherwise
approved by the Planning Office, 3) that a weed control plan must be more
effectively implemented within the corridor, and 4) that access points along Lot 18
and Lot 19 onto North 27th Avenue be limited to not more than one (1) shared
access.
14. That the subdivider install with final plat for Phase IV pedestrian/bike trail
identification signs in accordance with G.v.L.T. standards at both sides of Cattail
Street with the West Catron Creek pedestrian trail, and that the subdivider provide
typical details and specifications for the identification signs, for review and approval
by the Planning Office and Gallatin Valley Land Trust.
15. That water rights, or cash-in-lieu thereof, shall be provided and paid for prior to final
plat review and approval. If the final plat of the subdivision is filed in phases, water
rights, or cash-in-lieu thereof, will only be required for each phase of the subdivision
that is being filed. The applicant shall provide payment of the calculated cash-in-lieu
of water rights based on an amount determined by the Director of Public Service.
16. That all the subdivision blocks within the subdivision plat, separated by dedicated
public rights-of-way, shall be clearly delineated using individual block numbers with
each block containing its own group of lot numbers, unless determined differently
by the Director of Public Service.
17. That prior to proceeding with any ground disturbance or installation of municipal
infrastructure and/or streets, the subdivider shall provide the Planning Office with a
Cultural Resource Inventory determining if any unknown or unrecorded cultural
resources exist on the site in question and if such sites do exist, whether or not they
will be impacted by the development of said lands.
18. That prior to proceeding with any ground disturbance or installation of municipal
infrastructure and/or streets, the subdivider shall provide the Planning Office with
approved Section 310 and Section 404 Permits from the applicable review agencies
determining whether or not said watercourses and/or wetlands will be impacted by
the development of said lands.
19. That the applicant provides a landscape plan of the West Catron Creek and East
Catron Creek open space trail/stream corridors prepared by a certified landscape
architect or nurseryperson illustrating the landscape design features, location and
placement of the public pedestrian trail, typical cross section of the corridor including
public trail specifications, and site grading plan for review and approval prior to
submitting for final plat review and approval. The West Catron Creek public
trail/stream corridor shall be delineated on the final plat as identifying the entire
corridor being situated on the site of the major subdivision and not on a portion of
the adjoining property of Cattail Creek Subdivision, Phase I.
20. That the contractor physically installing said trail improvements shall be required to
hold a pre-construction meeting with the City of Bozeman Parks Department prior
to proceeding with installation of said trail improvements and provide the Planning
Office with written approval by the Superintendent of Facilities and Public Lands to
proceed with construction of the trail improvements, and that said provisions and
trail specifications be noted accordingly in the property owner's association
documents for review and approval by the Planning Office.
21. That the subdivider install a scored concrete pedestrian crosswalk with signage for
pedestrian and bike pathway crossings at the intersection Cattail Street and North
27th Avenue (Le., similar to that in Cattail Creek Subdivision), crosswalk markings
at the intersection of Cattail Street and Max Avenue, similar to that at the
02-02-04
.-- -......---.--.----- .-.----
--. .._m....___..._..._....___ ------ ------.-.-
- 15 -
intersection of Burke Avenue and Max Avenue, and continue the same crosswalk
scored concrete markings at the intersection with North 19th Avenue similar to the
intersection of Burke Street and North 19th Avenue. The subdivider shall submit
plans and specifications for all pedestrian bridges proposed for crossing East and/or
West Catron Creek, all street crossings, and signage details for review and approval
by the Planning Office, prior to proceeding with said improvements and prior to
submitting for final plat approval.
22. 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 common open space
or common areas in accordance with Section 16.14.11 O.A "City of Bozeman Rights-
of-Way".
23. Prior to proceeding with installation of any landscape irrigation wells, the applicant
shall obtain a well permit from the Gallatin County a nd Department 0 f Natural
Resources and Conservation.
24. That boulevard street lighting shall be incorporated into the subdivision and that all
lighting shall comply with City standards in effect at the time of installation, (Section
18.42.150 Unified Development Ordinance) with exception of Max Avenue, and shall
be subject to review and approval by Planning staff prior to installation.
25. That the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the property
owners' association shall be modified to include provisions for the installation,
maintenance and upkeep of the public trail/stream corridors, as well as the design
and installation of improvements within the corridors. This includes, but is not limited
to: 1) trail standards and installation specifications, 2) landscape design features, 3)
placement of landscape furniture and lighting, 4) pedestrian crossings and signage,
5) maintenance and upkeep of grass turf, 6) regular mowing, 7) control of noxious
weeds, 8) proper installation of landscape irrigation, 9) design, screening, and
approval of installation of irrigation wells and irrigation utilities, and 10) common
ownership of pubic trail/stream corridors, for review and approval by the Planning
Office prior to submitting for final plat review and approval.
26. The property owners' association documents shall be amended to state that no
structures, including, but not limited to irrigation wells, irrigation power facilities,
ground mounted utilities, impervious surfaces, pads, or other related utilities shall
be allowed in the public trail/stream corridors without further approval by the
Planning Office. Stormwater runoff facilities will not be permitted in the stream
corridor unless it exceeds the area of the corridor defined by the 50-foot watercourse
setback. The protective covenants shall also contain provisions for the maintenance
and upkeep of all common open space areas and public trail/stream corridors in a
healthy, growing condition at all times, and maintained under a single, annually
renewed contract with a qualified grounds maintenance contractor, for review and
approved by the City of Bozeman prior to submitting for final plat review and
approval.
27. Any grading plan that involves the relocation of the East and/or West Catron Creek
will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Office, as well as all applicable
review agencies; including, but not limited to, Montana Department of Fish, Wildlife
and Parks, Gallatin Conservation District, and City Engineer's office. Any final
grading plan for construction 0 f streets and infrastructure t hat a djoins a public
stream corridor s hall a Iso provide grading information for the relocation of any
watercourses for review and approval by the Planning Office prior to proceeding with
any installation of streets and/or municipal infrastructure.
28. That the final plat contain a notation stating that all downstream water user facilities
will not be impacted by this subdivision and that it also be noted accordingly in the
by-laws and protective covenants for the property owners' association.
02-02-04
-. -- ........----.---...-
- 16 -
29. Boulevard sidewalks will be installed along both sides of Max Avenue with the
extension of the private street to its intersection with Cattail Street or financially
guaranteed as required under Section 16.14.050 of the subdivision regulations.
30. Access onto North 27th Avenue from Lot 18 and Lot 19 will be limited to not more
than one (1) 30-foot-wide shared-access easement and noted accordingly on the
final plat and in the protective covenants of the association documents for review
and approval by the Planning Office.
31. The applicant shall dedicate with the final plat a 60-foot-wide public right-of-way for
Minter Street at the south end of Lot 19 that will continue from North 27th Avenue
eastward to the existing right-of-way for Rawhide Ridge.
32. The temporary turn around at the south end of North 27th Avenue will be
constructed in the 60-foot wide dedicated right-of-way for Minter Street, notthe West
Catron Creek stream corridor.
33. That the final plat shall comply with Section 16.08.070 "Final Plat" and Chapter
16.32 "Certificates" of the City of Bozeman Subdivision Regulations and shall
conform to all requirements of the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats
including provisions for all appropriate certificates and language, certification from
the City Engineer that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, and
accompanied by all appropriate documents, including a Platting Certificate. Four (4)
mylar copies of the final plat must be submitted for final plat approval, along with two
(2) digital copies of the final plat, on a double sided, high density 31f2-inch floppy
disk, and five (5) paper prints.
34. That the applicant obtain Montana Department of Environmental Quality approval
of the subdivision prior to final plat approval pursuant to Section 16.16.101 through
16.16.805 A.R.M.
35. That the applicant provide with the application for final plat review and approval a
copy of a signed Memorandum of Understanding with the Gallatin County Weed
Control District.
36. The final plat shall provide public utility easements along all front, side, and rear lot
lines as required by Section 16.14.050 "Easements" of the subdivision regulations.
However, in the event front and/or rear yard utility easements are used, side rear
yard easements must still be provided on the plat unless written confirmation is
submitted to the Planning Office from all utility companies and the Director of Public
Service indicating that front yard 25-foot-wide easements are adequate to service
said subdivision lots. The utility easement notation required in Section
16.14.060.B.4 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations shall also be provided on
the final plat.
37. That the final plat contain the following language that is readily visible with lettering,
at a minimum height of 1/4-inch, placing future landowners of individual lots on
notice of the presence of high groundwater in the area of the subdivision for review
and approval by the Planning Office:
"Due to the potential of high ground water tables in the areas of the
subdivision, it is not recommended that residential dwellings or
commercial structures with full or partial basements be constructed
without first consulting a professional engineer licensed in the State
of Montana and qualified in the certification of residential and
commercial construction."
38. The subdivider shall ensure that all construction material and other debris is
removed from the subdivision prior to final plat approval, or prior to release of said
financial guarantee, if an Improvements Agreement is necessary with the final plat.
02-02-04
--- - -- -.-.--
- 17 -
39. That the developer shall enter in an Improvements Agreement 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 installation of all improvements, the developer shall supply the City of
Bozeman with an acceptable method of security equal to one hundred fifty (150)
percent of the cost of the remaining improvements.
40. That the developer shall have three (3) years from the date of preliminary plat
approval to complete the conditions of preliminary plat approval and apply for final
plat approval. At the end of this period the City Commission may, at the written
request of the subdivider, extend its approval for a period of no more than one (1)
calendar year except that the City Commission may extend its approval for a period
of more than one (1) year if that approval period is included as a specific condition
of a written subdivision improvements agreement between the City Commission and
the subdivider, provided for in Chapter 16.22 of the Bozeman Subdivision
Reg u lations.
41. That the applicant submit with the application for final plat review and approval of
Gallatin Center Subdivision P.U.D., Phase IV, a written narrative stating how each
of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has been met or satisfactorily
addressed.
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 - preliminary plat for Baxter Meadows Subdivision. Phase II. Planned Unit
Development - subdivide :t76 acres described as a portion of the S% of Section 34. T1 S. R5E. MPM.
and the NE% of Section 3. T2S. R5E. MPM. into lots for neo-traditional mixed use residential and
commercial development. with multiple relaxations from the subdivision reaulations - Collaborative
Desian Architects. Inc.. for Baxter Meadows Development lalona north side of Baxter lane at
Flanders Mill Road extended) lP-03042)
This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the preliminary plat for Baxter Meadows
Subdivision, Phase II, Planned Unit Development, as requested by Collaborative Design Architects, Inc.,
for Baxter Meadows Development under Application No. P-03042, to subdivide :t76 acres described as a
portion of the South one-half of Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian,
and the Northeast one-quarter of Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian,
into lots for neo-traditional mixed use residential and commercial development, with relaxations from the
subdivision regulations as follows: (1) from Section 16.14.020, to decrease street frontage to less than 50
percent of the perimeter; (2) from Section 16.14.030.F., to increase average depth to greater than 3 times
the average width; (3) from Section 16.14.030. H., to allow no lot frontage on a public street; (4) from Section
16.14.040., to increase block length to more than 400 feet; (5) from Section 16.14.060, to allow association-
owned easements as shown on plat; (6) from Section 16.14.090, to be deferred until routes are extended;
(7) from Section 16.14.1 OO.E., to decrease street frontage to less than 50 percent of the perimeter; (8) from
Section 16.14.110, to omit landscaped boulevards; (9) from Section 16.14.170, to decrease watercourse
setback to 35 feet; (10) from Section 16.16.080, to allow private streets that do not meet City public street
standards; and (11) from Section 16.16.090, to allow private streets with greater right-of-way widths of 90
feet and 102 feet, greater paving widths, no boulevards, wider sidewalks and diagonal parking. The subject
property is located along north side of Baxter Lane at Flanders Mill Road extended.
Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing.
Contract Planner Windemaker presented the staff report. She reviewed this application, noting this
is phase 2; and the applicant is requesting three sub-phases of phase 2. Staff has reviewed this application
in light of the established criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings
can be found in the staff report. The applicant has requested numerous deviations, as listed in the staff
report, and the Contract Planner reviewed those requested deviations.
02-02-04
------------..---..
- 18 -
Contract Planner Windemaker noted that during the Planning Board meeting, the applicant's
representatives expressed their concerns with four conditions, numbers 49, 53, 80, and 81, and those
comments are included in the Planning Board minutes, which are included in the staff report. Staff does
not support changes to those conditions.
Jeff Kanning, Collaborative Design Architects, Inc., gave a power point presentation, reviewing the
history of this project, and the way it has been minimally changed to the current plan. The applicants have
reached an agreement with staff regarding the parking. The applicants would like to propose that they be
allowed to continue to construct buildings until all of the 600 parking spaces are accounted for, and then
they would be willing to build the 400 additional spaces. They are going to establish an escrow account for
parking and street improvements.
Mr. Kanning then reviewed the conditions as outlined in Planning Board's Resolution P-03042.
Regarding Condition 7, calling for parallel parking on both sides of Baxter Parkway, Mr. Kanning stated the
FOR Parks people would like parking adjacent to the linear park for better public access, and they are
proposing diagonal parking on the east s ide and horizontal parking on the west side. Condition 80,
regarding alley paving, has been revised to strike out the portion requiring the alley to be paved prior to
occupancy if the alley is used for the primary access. Mr. Kanning said it is the developer's intention to
provide the code-required trees and landscaping on the surface lots; and they would like one tree for every
four spaces on the street, plus trees on the bulb outs.
Russ McElyea, attorney for Baxter Meadows, requested condition 34 be entirely stricken, noting
applicability of that condition will reduce the property value to $250 per acre. They will agree to language
that will obligate the City to remove covenants upon presentation of a plan for future development.
Condition 35, utility installation, was discussed by Mr. Mackley, saying Baxter Meadows has a subsidiary
that installs fiber services; therefore, they request condition 35 be limited to power and gas installation only.
Mr. Mackley then turned his attention to condition 37, stating the applicants would like the word "internet"
removed and the following added: "any rights and privileges not specifically granted hereby are reserved
to grantor subject to applicable laws including the right to install high speed internet, fiber, or cable modum
internet facilities". This would provide more continuity with the language in Phase 1. Mr. Mackley closed
by addressing condition 41, noting this does not allow sub-phases except IIA, liB, and IIC. The applicant
wants this restriction to be removed.
Regarding condition 49, a spokesperson for the YMCA stated they are looking at a combined
development with the County and five acres of land donated by Jerry Williams and Baxter Meadows. The
YMCA development is proposed to be located in the "bend" with the hope Baxter Parkway might come in
behind the YMCA to create a situation where they might have a shared parking arrangement with the park.
However, that might create a situation where pedestrians will be going back and forth between the YMCA
and the park, which could potentially create a problem because of the traffic on Baxter Parkway.
Jeff Turczyn, 810 North Wallace Avenue, Lone Mountain Gymnastics, said he is entertaining the
idea of moving his business to the Baxter Meadows development, directly south of the Trakker Building.
The reasons why he's looking at Baxter Meadows as a site is because financially it makes good sense and
they need to stay convenient to people, and this is a child/family friendly environment. Mr. Turczyn said he
likes the idea of having angled parking around the building.
Jeff Kanning said they don't want to be saddled with an undue hardship regarding the parking
requirement when they don't know what is going to be appropriate. The applicant is trying to create a variety
of parking spaces to allow uses by different people at different times, and they are looking for flexibility to
accomplish that. They would like to have the YMCA located in this development, which would be a win/win
situation for everyone. While they are pleased with the two to four year deadline to complete the required
alley improvements, they need to be able to put down a gravel base in the alleys, rather than paving them
immediately.
Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff and City Attorney Luwe, Planner Windemaker stated
Condition 34 was written because this subdivision is cut out of the middle of a chunk of land, which leaves
pieces of land less than 160 acres. Remainders less than 160 acres are generally intended to be not for
transfer, and that is the reason for this condition.
Planning Director Epple added Planning staff has had a lengthy conversation with the Clerk and
Recorder's Office about this; and their conclusion is that under state law, if the parcel of land is under 160
02-02-04
-..... .----- --. .----... -.----..--.- - -.- --.-----. ----- --..-.-----------
---.--.--.---.--- ---..--. .... .....--.. -. ...
- 19-
acres and is considered for subdivision, it must be subject to subdivision review. This is a way to try to
make sure those tracts aren't sold, leased, or rented to others without the benefit of subdivision review.
Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff regarding condition 35, Planner Windemaker noted the
language contained in the Planning Board's resolution is the standard code. Staff doesn't support the
applicant's request for a deviation to allow association-owned easements of the size and location shown
on the plat. The code says if a developer is not going to meet the sizes specified in the code, then the
developer needs to get verification from all utilities that the size is acceptable to them.
City Attorney Luwe stated he has a concern with eliminating the word "internet" in condition 37
because by eliminating a utility's right to joint use of an easement, it would be opening the City up to some
type of discrimination suit. There would need to be a variance granted from the Certificate to do so.
Commissioner Kirchhoff said he can find no compelling reason to support the applicant's
suggestions for conditions 35 and 37. He asked if there is some concern by the applicant that a local utility
won't provide written verification that utilities can be installed in the easements. Brock Williams, applicant's
son, stated there is that concern. These conditions give any utility company the ability to stop any
subdivision by not providing written verification that their utilities can be properly installed in the utility
easements.
Jerry Williams, applicant, said the reason they are asking for modification of conditions 35 and 37
is because they are installing all utilities into their ditch in the alleys, which is a smaller area. The only
option is to allow the other utilities to dig over the top of each other, and then this subdivision will end up with
the standard utility easements in the front yards, like in Durston Meadows. Mr. Williams noted their
subsidiary company, Vivid Networks, has been formed; and they have taken it upon themselves to run true
fiber optics to every facility in this development.
Commissioner Kirchhoff pointed out that the applicants seem to be wanting to do things their way;
and rather than getting permission from the utility companies, they want to restrict competitive access.
Russ McElyea responded they are not restricting internet access; they will allow competitors, but
those competitors will be utilizing phone lines, while the applicants are providing fiber optics, which is 100
times faster than DSL. Vivid Networks wants to be able to market their services.
Jerry Williams stated Vivid Networks is truly a Public Service Commission regulated company, and
there is not enough room for everybody in that utility ditch. If other utilities want to go in, it will change the
whole concept of the Baxter Meadows development.
Planner Windemaker stated that condition 35 is a code requirement because the applicants are
proposing a non-standard utility easement, which requires written verification from the local utility
companies.
City Attorney Luwe said there is supposed to be sufficient area in a public utility easement to
accommodate all pUblic utilities. The condition should be changed to state "there is sufficient area to install
public utilities". He clarified that the Williams' want to ensure they are the sole provider of certain utilities,
and Planning staff wants to ensure there is sufficient room for competing utilities in the utility ditch.
Commissioner Kirchhoff inquired about condition 41, asking if the reason for that condition is staff
efficiency. Planning Director Epple stated it has been a very labor intensive effort to break phases into sub-
phases.
James Nicholson, Morrison/Maerle and Contract Engineerfor Baxter Meadows, addressed the issue
of phasing, saying a lot of the conditions are specific to phase IIA, liB, or IIC. If a sub-phase is added, the
City would want to add language giving staff the ability to require improvements as needed.
Commissioner Kirchhoff questioned condition 49, asking if the applicant is requesting to minimize
improvements to Baxter Parkway. City Attorney Luwe stated that will require a variance from the code
requirement. The applicants can apply for a variance if they choose, but condition 49 cannot be stricken.
Commissioner Kirchhoff then asked if staff is not in favor of changing or relaxing conditions 80 and
81. Contract Planner Windemaker replied the original language for those conditions is contained in the staff
02-02-04
- --------- _.. ...._.__u_____._......____. .-..-.-.----.-..---- ---
- 20-
report. The changes found in the Planning Board Resolution are changes made following Planning Board's
discussions and recommendations. The alley improvements are not tied to the phase, but what is occurring
on lots adjacent to the alley.
Commissioner Kirchhoff then inquired if the alleys are considered primary access by staff, and
Contract Planner Windemaker responded they are primary accesses to houses and possibly some of the
commercial areas.
Jeff Kanning stated conditions 80 and 81 have to do with building sequentially down the block; and
if those alleys are paved, they would have to be dug up with each new foundation. The applicant is
requesting to pave the alleys after a certain time period. They want to save the expense of digging up and
repaving with each new foundation, and they prefer the gravel standard as approved by the civil engineer.
Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the preliminary
plat for Baxter Meadows Subdivision, Phase II, Planned Unit Development, as requested by Collaborative
Design Architects, Inc., for Baxter Meadows Development under Application No. P-03042, to subdivide :t76
acres described as a portion of the South one-half of Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, Montana
Principal Meridian, and the Northeast one-quarter of Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana
Principal Meridian, into lots for neo-traditional mixed use residential and commercial development, with
relaxations from the subdivision regulations as follows: (1) from Section 16.14.020, to decrease street
frontage to less than 50 percent of the perimeter; (2) from Section 16.14.030.F., to increase average depth
to greater than 3 times the average width; (3) from Section 16.14.030.H., to allow no lot frontage on a public
street; (4) from Section 16.14.040., to increase block length to more than 400 feet; (5) from Section
16.14.060, to allow association-owned easements as shown on plat; (6) from Section 16.14.090, to be
deferred until routes are extended; (7) from Section 16.14.1 OO.E., to decrease street frontage to less than
50 percent of the perimeter; (8) from Section 16.14.110, to omit landscaped boulevards; (9) from Section
16.14.170, to decrease watercourse setback to 35 feet; (10) from Section 16.16.080, to allow private streets
that do not meet City public street standards; and (11) from Section 16.16.090, to allow private streets with
greater right-of-way widths of 90 feet and 102 feet, greater paving widths, no boulevards, wider sidewalks
and diagonal parking, be approved subject to the following conditions:
Plannina Subdivision Specific Conditions - Phase IIA (Blocks 16. 18. 20 and Tracts 1A. 1B) and
Phase IIC (Blocks 15. 17. 19 and 21):
1. If concurrent construction is approved for Phase IIA and IIC, a concurrent
construction plan, for an approved final lot-specific plan that addresses all aspects
of Section 16.22.030 may be submitted for review, evaluation and consideration.
Subdivider shall remain responsible for all building permits until all infrastructure
improvements are compete and accepted by the City of Bozeman. No occupancy
shall be permitted until all infrastructure improvements are complete and all other
conditions have been met.
2. Applicant shall provide parking for Blocks 16, 18 and 20 of Phase IIA based on the
following calculation: ((net building area (gross lot area minus 20%) x 2 (floors)) /
1,000) x 1.72. Applicant shall provide parking for Blocks 17,19 and 21 of Phase IIC
at a ratio supported by a parking demand study on Blocks 16, 18 and 20 of Phase IIA
but shall not be less than the requirement based on the following calculation: ((net
building area (gross lot area minus 20 percent) x 2 (floors)) /1 ,000) x 1.72. Applicant
may use a combination of the following options:
net buildinq area (qross lot area minus 20%) x 2 (floors) X1.72
1,000
Option 1. Applicant shall construct surface parking. Construction shall
include, but not be limited to, continuous concrete curbs, asphalt,
striping, drive approach, landscaping, and irrigation. Pursuant to
Condition No. 44, surface parking shall be constructed within 1 year
of final plat approval and prior to occupancy of any structure.
02-02-04
__ ._ _....... n_..._.. .........---
-------- -------.....-.....
- 21 -
Option 2. Applicant shall construct a parking garage. Pursuant to
Condition No. 44, parking garage shall be constructed within 1 year of
final plat approval and prior to occupancy of any structure.
Option 3. Applicant shall establish an escrow account in the name of
the property owners' association for the sole purpose of providing
parking. Applicant shall place in the escrow account 150 percent of
the cost of constructing the surface parking, applicant shall restrict on
the plat all lots required to meet the surface parking needs, and
applicant may reserve air space for other uses. Pursuant to Condition
No. 43, all parking facilities shall be constructed within 4 years of
preliminary plat approval.
Option 4. Applicant shall establish an escrow account in the name of
the property owners' association for the sole purpose of providing
parking. Applicant shall place in the escrow account 150 percent of
the cost of constructing a parking structure, applicant shall restrict on
the plat all lots required to meet the parking structure needs, and
applicant may reserve air space above the height of the parking
structure for other uses. Pursuant to Condition No. 43, all parking
facilities shall be constructed within 4 years of preliminary plat
approval.
Nothing herein precludes the applicant from utilizing areas set aside for parking
facilities (surface or garage) for other purposes provided these conditions are not
violated and applicant submits to site plan review.
Applicant shall covenant all lots required to meet the parking needs, granting parking
access to all purchasers of property in Blocks 16 thru 21 and the property owners'
association. Applicant shall make the property owners' association responsible for
liability insurance, taxes, use, and maintenance of all parking facilities.
3. Applicant shall fulfill Condition No.2, Option 1 or 2, prior to occupancy of any
structure; and 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. If the applicant
selects either Option 3 or 4, it shall be fulfilled prior to filing the final plat.
4. One-foot wide "no access" strips shall be placed along both sides of Baxter Lane to
preclude direct lot access onto Baxter Lane.
5. The mid-block utility/access easements shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and shall
include a pedestrian walkway.
6. A minimum 50-foot watercourse setback, pursuant to Section 16.14.170, shall be
clearly delineated on the final plat and shall include all adjacent wetlands. On-site
stormwater treatment facilities may be located within the Zone 2 portion of the
watercourse setback.
7. Baxter Parkway shall be designed with parallel parking on both sides of the street.
8. Phase IIC may not receive final plat approval prior to final plat approval of Phase IIA.
Plannina Subdivision Specific Conditions - Phase liB (Blocks 9.10.11.12.13 and 14):
9. If concurrent construction is approved for Phase liB, a concurrent construction plan
that addresses all aspects of Section 16.22.030 may be submitted for review,
evaluation and consideration. Subdivider shall remain responsible for all building
permits until all infrastructure improvements are complete and accepted by the City
of Bozeman. No occupancy shall be permitted until all infrastructure improvements
are complete and all other conditions have been met.
02-02-04
- .---.-....--...-.
- 22-
10. A minimum 35-foot watercourse setback pursuant to Section 16.14.170 shall be
clearly delineated on the final plat and shall include all adjacent wetlands.
Plannina Subdivision SDecific Conditions - All Phases:
11. Plans and specifications shall include detailed parking plans. These parking plans
shall include full details for parking to be constructed immediately; and preliminary
details, locations, and costs for both the surface parking required to meet the PUD
minimum requirements, as well as, the proposed parking garage. Provide sufficient
design detail for the parking garage, including parking stall width and depth, driveway
width, number of spaces, and ramp location to assure structure will fit on designated
lot. In addition, provide a study from a professional engineer or licensed architect
estimating the cost per space for the completion of the structure. The estimate
should be based on recently constructed parking structures of similar size and
characteristics.
12. Documentation of satisfaction of park dedication requirements, in accordance with
Section 16.14.100 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations, shall be provided. For
residential units, 0.03 acres per dwelling unit shall be dedicated for parkland. For
non-residential (unless restricted to non-residential uses by deed) and multi-family,
11 percent of the total square feet of lot area shall be dedicated for parkland.
13. Applicant shall submit a formal development plan for the design of the dedicated
parkland( s) for review and approval by the Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory
Board, signed by a certified landscape architect. Details of plantings, species,
topography, irrigation system, and any permanent park features shall be shown and
discussed with the plan. The applicant shall obtain written approval from the
Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory Board regarding the final design prior to
submittal of the formal development plan for review and approval by the City
Commission.
14. Applicant shall submit a formal development plan for the design of the dedicated
parkland(s), for review and approval by the City Commission, signed by a certified
landscape architect. Details of plantings, species, topography, irrigation system, and
any permanent features shall be shown and discussed with the plan. Approval of the
City Commission shall be obtained prior to installation of any improvements. The
approved development plan shall be provided with the final plat.
15. Applicant shall submit a formal development plan, signed by a certified landscape
architect, for the design of all parkland(s), open space, watercourse setback,
boulevards, pedestrian walks/pathways, and center area for review and approval by
the Superintendent of Facilities and Lands. Details of plantings, species, topography,
irrigation system, and any permanent features shall be shown and discussed with the
plan. Approval of the Superintendent of Facilities and Lands shall be obtained prior
to installation of any improvements. The approved development plan shall be
provided with the final plat.
16. Upon approval of the formal development plan by all three parties specified in the
condition numbers 13, 14 and 15, the applicant shall develop a Park Master Plan for
all parkland and open space. The Master Plan will include a narrative that addresses
the fOllowing topics: History of the Property; Description of the Existing Conditions;
Needs Analysis of the Park; Proposed Present and Future Park Uses and Activities;
Description of the Level of Service Designated for the Park, including mowing,
fertilization, weed control, irrigation, snow removal, trash collection, and landscaping
maintenance. The developed Master Plan will be submitted to the Superintendent
of Facilities and Land for review and approval by City staff, the Recreation and Parks
Advisory Board, and the City Commission.
17. Applicant shall be responsible for installation of all parkland(s), open space,
watercourse setback, boulevards/medians, pedestrian walks/pathways and center
area related improvements. Construction of the improvements will be to City
02-02-04
-- --------------- -.".--------
- 23-
standards and must be completed with City oversight, including a preconstruction
meeting.
18. Applicant shall be responsible for installation of pedestrian/equestrian trail(s)
connecting to the pedestrian/equestrian trail(s) to the south and extending to the north
end of the linear park. The specific trail(s) design(s) will be determined during the
formal development plan approval process specified in condition numbers 13, 14 and
15. At a minimum, the pedestrian trail will be constructed to the Class II design
standards. Construction of the improvements will be to City standards and must be
completed with City oversight, including a preconstruction meeting.
19. Applicant shall be responsible for installing landscaping and an irrigation system in
the public right-of-way boulevard strips and medians along all external subdivision
streets and adjacent to parkland( s), open space, watercourse setback, pedestrian
walks/pathway, and center areas pursuant to Section 16.14.110 of the Bozeman
Subdivision Regulations.
20. All landscaped common areas shall have an underground irrigation system installed
in compliance with City standards and specifications. The applicant shall provide
irrigation system as-builts in accordance with Section 16.08.090.
21. Maintenance of common areas and facilities such as parkland(s), open space, rights-
of-way, parking facilities, pedestrian walks/pathways and center area, etc. shall be
provided by the developer and/or homeowners' association in accordance with
Section 16.14.130.
22. The final plat shall contain the following language that is readily visible with lettering
on the plat at a minimum width of 3/16 inch in height, placing future landowners of
individual lots on notice of the presence of high groundwater in the area of the
subdivision:
"Due to relatively high ground water table within t he areas 0 f the
subdivision, it is not recommended that residential dwellings with full
basements be constructed without first consulting a professional
engineer. If daylight basements are incorporated in the construction of
residential dwellings, they should not have a depth greater than three
(3) feet below the top of the curb or crown of the street from which it
is served."
23. Applicant shall provide a soils report, along with building plans, to the Building
Division, recommending types of foundations. If development shall occur in phases,
the soils report may address those lots within the proposed phase.
24. Subdivision lighting shall be incorporated into the subdivision by one of the following:
a) the subdivider shall install street and pathway lighting throughout the subdivision
pursuant to Section 16.14.230 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations. Lighting
shall be maintained by means of the property owners' association through protective
covenants; or b) the subdivider shall participate in a Street Improvement Lighting
District (SILO) for the provision of street and pathway lighting pursuant to Section
16.14.230 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations. All subdivision lighting provided
shall conform to Section 16.14.230 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations. A
lighting plan including isofootcandle plots and description of the proposed equipment,
with details and specifications (cut sheets), bulb type and size, and locations shall be
provided with the final plat and subject to review and approval by the Planning
Department.
25. Prior to final plat approval, a Memorandum of Understanding shall be entered into by
the Weed Control District and the subdivider for t he control of County declared
noxious weeds. A signed copy of this Understanding must be provided to the
Planning Department.
02-02-04
- 24-
26. A declaration of covenants for this subdivision must be included and recorded with
the final plat that specifically includes the provisions from Section 16.34.030. A draft
of these covenants must be submitted for review and approval by the Planning
Department prior to filing and recordation with the Gallatin County Clerk and
Recorder.
27. Prior to final plat approval, a property owners' association shall be established for
maintenance of subdivision streets, common open space, centers, parking facilities,
pathways and trails, boulevards and medians, alleys, stormwater facilities and/or
parks pursuant to Section 16.34.020. A draft of these documents must be submitted
for review and approval by the Planning Department at least 30 days prior to filing
and recordation with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder.
28. Prior to final plat approval, a common area and facility maintenance plan and
guarantee shall be provided for the permanent care and maintenance of commonly
owned open spaces, recreational areas, facilities, private streets and alleys, and
parking facilities. The same shall be submitted to the City Attorney and shall not be
accepted by the City until approved as to legal form and effect. A draft of these
documents must be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department
at least 30 days prior to filing and recordation with the Gallatin County Clerk and
Recorder.
29. The landowner agrees to provide the City with a payback of $15,000 per the payback
schedule dated May 10, 2001, for the North 19th Avenue/Baxter Lane signalization.
Of this total payback, the landowner agrees to pay $ 0.00215216 per square foot of
gross area platted to the City prior to final plat approval for each phase of the
development.
30. Executed waivers of right to protest creation of special improvement districts (SIOs),
acknowledging that the City will not assume dedication and/or maintenance of the
local private streets that vary from City standards unless the street( s) are brought up
to City standards, or the property owners agree to an assessment to fund
improvements required to bring the street(s) up to City standards. The waiver shall
be filed and of record with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder prior to final plat
approval. A copy of the filed documents shall be submitted with the final plat.
31. Executed waivers of right to protest creation of special improvement districts (SIDs)
for a park maintenance district shall be filed and of record with the Gallatin County
Clerk and Recorder prior to final plat approval. A copy of the filed documents shall
be submitted with the final plat.
32. Executed waivers of right to protest creation of special improvement districts (SIDs)
for the following future improvements: Baxter Lane and North 19th Avenue signal
improvements, Baxter Lane and Baxter Parkway signal improvements, and North
19th Avenue improvements shall be filed and of record with the Gallatin County Clerk
and Recorder prior to final plat approval. A copy of the filed documents shall be
submitted with the final plat.
33. 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).
34. Property restrictions shall be placed on all original tract(s) of record of this property
that are or through this subdivision will become remainder tract(s) of less than 160
acres. The property restrictions shall be filed and of record with the Gallatin County
Clerk and Recorder prior to final plat approval. A copy of the filed documents shall
be submitted with the final plat. The tract(s) shall be legally described and the
following statement shall be placed on the tract(s):
02-02-04
----...----.... --.---...-
- 25-
"Ownership of this tract of land is restricted by covenant running with
the land, revocable only by mutual consent of the City of Bozeman and
the property owner, that the divided land will be used exclusively for
farming purposes. No building or structure requiring water or sewer
facilities shall be utilized on the tract. A change in use of the land for
anything other than agricultural purposes subjects the division to the
Bozeman Municipal Code and the Montana Subdivision and Platting
Act."
35. Prior to final plat approval, written verification that utilities can be installed in the
proposed utility easements shall be obtained from all local utility agencies.
36. Prior to final plat approval, a Final PUD Plan, complying with the requirements of
Chapter 18.36 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, shall be submitted
for review and approval.
37. The Certificate of Dedication shall be shown on the final plat and shall include the
following statement(s):
"The above-described tract of land is to be known and designated as
(name of subdivision), City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana;
and the lands included in all streets, avenues, alleys, and parks or
public squares shown on said plat are hereby granted and donated to
the City of Bozeman for the public use and enjoyment. The lands
included in all streets, avenues, alleys, and parks or public squares
dedicated to the public are accepted for public use, but the City
accepts no responsibility for maintaining the same. The owner(s)
agree(s) that the City has no obligation to maintain the lands included
in all streets, avenues, alleys, and parks or public squares hereby
dedicated to pUblic use. The lands included in all streets, avenues,
alleys, and parks or public squares dedicated to the public which the
City accepts responsibility for maintaining include (list specific lands).
"The undersigned hereby grants unto each and every person, firm, or
corporation, whether public or private, providing or offering to provide
telephone, electric power, gas, internet or cable television service to
the public, the right to the joint use of an easement for the
construction, maintenance, repair, and removal of their lines and other
facilities in, over, under, and across each area designated on this plat
as 'Utility Easement' to have and to hold forever."
38. The Certificate of Completion of Improvements shall be amended to list all
improvements not completed.
39. The Certificate of Exclusion from Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Review shall be shown on the final plat and the Release of Sanitary Restrictions
removed from the final plat.
40. Any unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as
conditions of approval, do not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the
lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State of Montana.
41. No sub-phases of Phase IIA, liB and IIC shall be permitted except the applicant may
submit a Phase liD consisting of Tracts 1A and 1 B subject to all applicable conditions
of final plat approval.
Plannina Code Provisions:
42. 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 byall required documents, including certification from the City Engineer
02-02-04
._"......_...._.u .-....-
- 26-
that as-built drawings for public improvements were received, a platting certificate,
and all required and corrected certificates. The final plat application shall include four
(4) signed reproducible copies on a 3 mil or heavier stable base polyester film (or
equivalent); two (2) digital copies on a double-sided, high density 3'Y2-inch floppy disk;
and five (5) paper prints.
43. 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 0 f request for the extension 0 f the period to the
Planning Director for the City Commission's consideration.
44. If it is the developer'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.
45. The applicant shall submit with the application for final plat review and approval, a
written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plat approval has
been satisfactorily addressed.
Enaineerina Subdivision SDecific Conditions:
46. Stormwater Master Plan:
A 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 must be provided to and approved by the City Engineer.
The master plan must depict the maximum sized retention basin location, show
location of and provide easements for adequate drainage ways within the subdivision
to transport runoff to the stormwater receiving channel. The plan shall include
sufficient site grading and elevation information (particularly for the basin site,
drainage ways, and finished lot grades), typical stormwater detention/retention basin
and discharge structure details, basin sizing calculations, and a stormwater
maintenance plan.
Any stormwater ponds located within a park or open space shall be designed and
constructed to be conducive to the normal use and maintenance of the open space.
Stormwater ponds for runoff generated by the subdivision (e.g., general lot runoff,
public or private streets, common open space, parks, etc.) shall not be located on
easements within privately owned lots.
While the runoff from the individual lots will be dependent on the intensity of use on
each lot, the maximum sizing of the storm retention facilities for each lot will be
established based on maximum site development. Final facility sizing may be
reviewed and reduced during design review of the final site plan for each lot and/or
phase.
47. A street and traffic control signage plan for the subdivision shall be prepared and
implemented upon review and approval by the City Engineer.
48. Any improvement placed in the public right of way shall be approved by the City
Engineering Office.
49. Pursuant to Section 16.16.01.A. of the Bozeman Municipal Code, Baxter Parkway,
including sewer, water, and other necessary infrastructure, shall be constructed
adjacent to the west property boundary of Tract 1 and shall extend approximately
1700 feet to the south and east to the boundary of Phase 5. Baxter Parkway shall be
02-02-04
--..--.-.---
-------.----...-.....
- 27-
constructed to a standard roadway section as approved by the City Engineering
Office. The applicant is advised that further development of Tract 1 will likely require
a secondary access be provided.
50. The location of existing water and sewer mains shall be properly depicted and
proposed main extensions shall be noted as proposed on the infrastructure plans and
specifications.
51. Project phasing shall be clearly defined on the infrastructure plans and specifications
including installation of infrastructure.
52. As part of the infrastructure plans submittal, 100-year flood elevations shall be
computed for the Baxter-Border Ditch and the limits of flooding identified. If flooding
limits encroach onto proposed lots, this shall be noted on the final plat along with a
minimum floor elevation for the structures to be constructed on the lots.
53. Baxter Lane shall be fully improved to the appropriate typical section where adjacent
to Phase II, which extends from the west boundary of Phase I improvements through
the intersection of Caspian Avenue. The entire length shall be constructed with
Phase IIA.
54. All street names are subject to approval by the City Engineer.
55. The applicant shall provide easements, in a form acceptable to the City, for all on and
off-site sewer and water improvements. All water and sewer main easements shall
be a minimum of 30 feet wide.
56. Easements shall be provided for all off-site drainage facilities.
57. Utility easements shall be granted on the final plat in accordance with the
requirements of Section 16.14.060 of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations.
58. City standard sidewalks shall be constructed on all pUblic and private street frontages
prior to occupancy of any structure, as per the terms and conditions of Section
16.14.050 of the Bozeman Municipal Code.
59. For Phases IIA and IIC, sidewalks shall be installed to provide pedestrian access to
parking needed by any particular structure prior to occupancy of said structure. This
condition does not replace the need to meet 16.14.050 of the Bozeman Municipal
Code.
60. The Montana 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, MPDES etc.)
shall be obtained prior to construction of the associated improvements.
61. All infrastructure improvements including 1) water and sewer main extensions, and
2) pUblic streets, private streets, curb/gutter, sidewalks fronting parks, open space,
rear yard frontages or other non-lot frontages, and related storm drainage
infrastructure improvements shall be financially guaranteed or constructed prior to
final plat approval.
62. Plans and specifications, and a detailed design report for water and sewer main
extensions, storm sewer, and the public street, prepared by a professional engineer,
shall be provided to and approved by the City Engineer and the Montana Department
of Environmental Quality. The applicant 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 pre-construction conference has been conducted.
02-02-04
- 28-
No building permits shall be issued prior to substantial completion and City
acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements unless approved for
concurrent construction.
63. All proposed manholes need to be accessible to the City's large flusher truck. The
applicant shall submit an all-weather access plan with the project infrastructure plans
subject to approval by the City Water/Sewer Superintendent.
64. The property owners' association shall be responsible for the maintenance of all
storm water facilities constructed for the project.
65. The applicant shall obtain permission from the appropriate ditch companies to
discharge storm runoff into the ditches and for any relocation(s).
66. All ditch easements and setbacks shall be shown on the final plat.
67. No on-street parking shall be permitted within 20 feet of a crosswalk at any
intersection.
68. All of the recommendations made in the Traffic Impact Analysis for the Baxter
Meadows Development by Robert Peccia & Associates, dated October 2001, and the
updated report, dated October, 2003, shall be implemented with Phase 2 unless the
improvements are specifically identified to be completed with a later phase. A portion
of the report requires updating as noted in condition numbers 70 and 71, each
updated section and subsequent recommendations shall be subject to approval ofthe
City Engineer and the approved recommendations shall be implemented with Phase
II.
69. The updated Traffic Impact Study prepared by Robert Peccia and Associates
identified the need for a traffic signal at the intersection of Baxter Parkway and Baxter
Lane upon the completion of Phase 6 of the development. In addition, the report
recommended the installation of left turn bays on each approach of the intersection
in order for the signal to function properly. Sufficient pavement width shall be
included in the design and construction of this intersection, along with the installation
of underground conduits for the signal wiring, and necessary right-of-way dedication
with the Phase II final plat.
70. The Traffic Impact Study recommended a dedicated left-turn lane at the intersection
of Charolais Avenue and Baxter Lane, along with a roundabout at the intersection of
Baxter Lane and Caspian Avenue. As the current submittal does not include these
recommended improvements, the applicant's traffic engineer shall address these
issues in an update to the original traffic study. Any modification to the original study
shall be approved by the City Engineer
71. The Traffic Impact Study recommended that a grade separated pedestrian/bicycle
crossing under Baxter Lane near Baxter Parkway be implemented as part of the
Baxter Meadows project. Either design and install the crossing with Phase II of the
project, including the dedication of necessary right of way, or provide an update to the
Traffic Impact Study with justification and details on how the crossing can be installed
safely as an at-grade crossing. Any modification to the original study shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
72. The north access to Block 15, the apartment site, shall line up directly across from the
proposed alley in Phase IV.
73. All easements identified in the title report shall be depicted on the final plat.
74. The Certificate of Surveyor on the final plat shall be in conformance with Section
16.32.050 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, Subdivisions.
75. A breakdown of areas shall be provided for each phase on the final plat.
02-02-04
..--.--...--.... -... - ___._u....._....
- 29-
76. The final plat shall clearly state which streets are privately maintained.
77. Pursuant to the recommendations of the Traffic Impact Study, prepared by Robert
Pecci a and Associates, any damage of Baxter Lane from the intersection with North
19th Avenue to the entrance of the project caused by project construction activities,
shall be repaired by the applicant. The applicant shall agree to repair any damage
within- one week of notification by the City that repairs are required. The applicant
shall maintain the existing bond of $1 0,000, which was submitted with Phase I of the
project.
78. The City will only accept pUblic maintenance of the streets in Phase liB that are
located to the west of the east side of the intersection of Gallatin Green Boulevard
and Equestrian Way.
79. City standard sidewalks shall be installed on the west side of Baxter Parkway.
80. If concurrent construction is utilized for Phase IIA and IIC, all alleys shall be paved
within two years after final platting or four years after preliminary plat approval,
whichever occurs first. The alley shall be required to be paved once foundations and
utilities are in place for all adjacent lots, which will be conditioned during the site plan
approval process.
81. If concurrent construction is utilized for Phase liB, all infrastructure shall be installed
and accepted by the City prior to occupancy of any structure, with the exception of
alleys which may utilize a gravel standard as approved by the City Engineer until such
time as all adjacent foundations are installed. All alleys shall be paved within two
years afterfinal platting orfour years after preliminary plat approval, whichever occurs
first.
82. The property owners dependent on the sewage lift station shall be responsible for
financing the costs of its operation and maintenance, which will be the responsibility
of the City. The applicant shall agree in writing to a surcharge to cover the costs of
operating and maintaining the lift station. The agreement shall be filed with the final
plat and shall apply to all heirs, successors, and assigns. The agreement shall be
subject to approval by the City Engineer and the City Attorney.
83. As stated in the subdivision preliminary plat submittal, all alleys will be paved to a
minimum of 20 feet. Snow removal responsibilities in all alleys shall be private.
Other maintenance needs in the alleys shall be the responsibility of the City.
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.
Public hearina ~ Conditional Use Permit for Baxter Meadows. Phase II. Planned Unit Development -
neo-traditional mixed use residential and commercial development on ::1:76 acres described as a
portion of the S% of Section 34. T1S. R5E. MPM. and the NEY.. of Section 3. T2S. R5E. MPM. with
relaxations from several zoning reaulations - Collaborative Desian A rchitects. Inc.. for Baxter
Meadows Development (alona north side of Baxter Lane at Flanders Mill Road extended) (Z-03276)
This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit for Baxter
Meadows, Phase II, Planned Unit Development, as requested by Collaborative Design Architects, Inc., for
Baxter Meadows Development under Application No. Z-03276, to allow a neo-traditional mixed use
residential and commercial development on :t76 acres described as a portion of the South one-half of
Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian, and the Northeast one-quarter
of Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian, with relaxations from the
following zoning regulations: (1) from Section 18.18.030, to increase maximum lot coverage to 55 percent;
(2) from Section 18.16.040, to decrease minimum lot area to 2,432 square feet and decrease minimum lot
width to 25 feet; (3) from Section 18.16.050, to decrease minimum front yard setback to 10 feet and
minimum rear yard setback to 2 feet; (4) from Section 18.18.020, to allow residential uses; (5) from Section
02-02-04
- 30-
18.18.030, to omit lot coverage requirements; (6) from Section 18.18.040, to decrease minimum lot width
to 46 feet; (7) from Section 18.18.050, to omit yard requirements; (8) from Section 18.18.060, to increase
maximum building height to 72 feet; (9) from Section 18.42.020, to decrease street frontage to less than 50
percent of perimeter; (10) from Section 18.42.1 OO.B., to decrease minimum watercourse setback to 35 feet;
(11) from Section 18.42.140, to allow use of alleys for loading; (12) from Section 18.44.100, to measure
street vision triangle from the bulb-out curb line; (13) from Section 18.46.020.0., to allow backing into public
rights-of-way; (14) from Section 18.4.040, to reduce total number of parking spaces required for non-
residential uses, locate required parking spaces in public right-of-way, and count on-street parking spaces;
and (15) from Chapter 18.48, to landscape in accordance with submitted plan. The subject property is
located along north side of Baxter Lane at Flanders Mill Road extended.
Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing.
Contract Planner Windemaker presented the staff report, noting staff has reviewed this application
in light of the applicable criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings can
be found in the staff report. Planner Windemaker noted the western portion of this phase of development,
liB, is zoned R-3, the north and eastern portions, IIC, are zoned B-2, and the southern portion, IIA, is zoned
R-3. The density of the residential portion is eight units per net acre, which is consistent with the
established guidelines. The applicant is requesting to have their parking requirements calculated based
on a special formula, which would provide less parking than required. Contract Planner Windemaker stated
it is difficult to determine how much of a decrease the applicant is requesting; it could be a 12 to 35 percent
reduction, based on two-story structures. Staff's recommended condition allows a 10 percent reduction.
Therefore, the Design Review Board is unwilling to support the requested deviation to building height in the
B-2 area. The applicant has stated it is not his intention to under-park the commercial area, and he has also
offered to establish an escrow account for additional parking and improvements.
Responding to Commissioner Youngman's request, Contract Planner Windemaker outlined the
requested deviations, noting the first three requested deviations apply to the R-3 zoned areas. Those
deviations are not addressed in any condition and are acceptable as proposed. The next deviation pertains
to authorized uses and is addressed in condition six. That condition says residential uses on the ground
floor are not appropriate in certain blocks, so staff recommends partial acceptance of this deviation. The
next three requested deviations pertain to the B-2 zone and are addressed by condition 7. The
recommendation is for partial acceptance. Requested deviation 8, building height, is addressed by condition
2 and was rejected by the Design Review Board. Contract Planner Windemaker stated requested deviation
9, neighborhood centers, is recommended for acceptance. The requested deviation regarding watercourse
setbacks is addressed in both condition 5 and condition 10. Condition 5 rejects the deviation for the
commercial area, while condition 10 accepts the deviation for the residential area. The deviation to allow
the use of alleys for loading was recommended for acceptance. The deviation to allow backing into the
public rights-of-way was accepted, given the plat conditions. The landscaping deviation was recommended
to be accepted.
Jeff Kanning addressed condition 2, building height, saying they once were at 96 feet; now they are
asking to be allowed to construct four-story buildings, with a maximum height of 56 feet. That would allow
them to stay at four stories, while giving them the opportunity to do something different with the roof design
elements. They believe this is an adequate compromise. Mr. Kanning said the real parking issue is how
much parking has to be constructed up front. They want to use their formula because they don't know how
this is going to build out. The parking requirement is placing an undue burden on Baxter Meadows at this
point because they can't foresee what is going to happen. The applicant wants to use the 600 planned
spaces initially and establish an escrow account so there will be a money source available for providing the
additional parking spaces and other improvements needed for the public right of way. Mr. Kanning said the
applicant wants to reach an amenable agreement on the parking issue and proceed with the construction
of Baxter Meadows.
Commissioner Hietala polled the other Commissioners to determine how they want to deal with the
parking proposal. Contract Planner Windemaker noted the applicant's parking formula is based on a
two-story building, which is why staff believes this issue needs to be revisited each time. Commissioner
Krauss stated it doesn't benefit anyone if there is money available, but nowhere to put the additional
parking. Commissioner Hietala asked if the other Commissioners were supportive of the request for four-
story buildings, with a maximum height of 56 feet. He then pointed out if the City compromised with the
applicant on 750 initial parking spaces, that would accommodate a building height of three stories.
02-02-04
- 31 -
Commissioner Krauss stated he is more inclined to give in on building height, rather than on the number
of required parking spaces.
Jerry Williams stated they are not proposing to build four-story buildings with the amount of parking
required now. If someone were to buy a lot and come forward with a four-story building proposal, there
would be extra parking required. The higher the building, the more parking spaces that are going to be
required for that particular building; that is outlined in the conditions.
Responding to questions from Commissioner Hietala and Commissioner Kirchhoff, the Contract
Planner explained that this is where conditions three and four come into play. With a site specific
application, the number of stories dictates the parking requirements, as outlined in the Bozeman Unified
Development Ordinance. The applicant would receive a 10-percent reduction in the number of required
parking spaces; but then if there is still a shortage, those spaces would have to be provided on site as
private parking spaces rather than the public ones addressed in the plat. The additional parking probably
would be located beside or under the building.
Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing.
Mayor Cetraro questioned the concurrent construction, and Planner Windemaker responded the
applicant has requested concurrent construction for the entire phase. That can be addressed in two ways;
in the commercial area, condition one requires each site plan to go to the Development Review Committee
for review, and in the residential portion, condition 9 gives the applicant the opportunity to bring forward one
concurrent building proposal and receive blanket approval for concurrent construction, if the Commission
agrees.
Commissioner Hietala noted that still leaves the question of building height, to which Contract
Planner Windemaker replied there is a provision in the code that with a conditional use permit, the building
height in a B-2-zoned area can increase up to 30 percent. The numbers in condition two would have to be
changed to "49 feet" and "57 feet", in place of the current "38 feet" and "44 feet".
Mayor Cetraro noted that part of the effort of the Unified Development Ordinance was to provide for
taller buildings; but if a developer wanted to go above the standard allowed, it would be through the
Conditional Use Permit process. That gives the City the opportunity to impose conditions to mitigate height.
Commissioner Kirchhoff said he doesn't believe a blanket approval of height should be given. He
is in favor of keeping the height as proposed in the staff report and dealing with the additional height through
the Conditional Use Permit process.
It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the Conditional
Use Permit for Baxter Meadows, Phase II, Planned Unit Development, as requested by Collaborative Design
Architects, Inc., for Baxter Meadows Development under Application No. Z-03276, to allow a neo-traditional
mixed use residential and commercial development on :1:76 acres described as a portion of the South one-
half of Section 34, Township 1 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian, and the Northeast one-
quarter of Section 3, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, Montana Principal Meridian, with relaxations from
the following zoning regulations: (1) from Section 18.18.030, to increase maximum lot coverage to 55
percent; (2) from Section 18.16.040, to decrease minimum lot area to 2,432 square feet and decrease
minimum lot width to 25 feet; (3) from Section 18.16.050, to decrease minimum front yard setback to 10 feet
and minimum rear yard setback to 2 feet; (4) from Section 18.18.020, to allow residential uses; (5) from
Section 18.18.030, to omit lot coverage requirements; (6) from Section 18.18.040, to decrease minimum
lot width to 46 feet; (7) from Section 18.18.050, to omit yard requirements; (8) from Section 18.18.060, to
increase maximum building height to 72 feet; (9) from Section 18.42.020, to decrease street frontage to less
than 50 percent of perimeter; (10) from Section 18.42.1 OO.B., to decrease minimum watercourse setback
to 35 feet; (11) from Section 18.42.140, to allow use of alleys for loading; (12) from Section 18.44.100, to
measure street vision triangle from the bulb-out curb line; (13) from Section 18.46.020.0., to allow backing
into public rights-of-way; (14) from Section 18.4.040, to reduce total number of parking spaces required for
non-residential uses, locate required parking spaces in public right-of-way, and count on-street parking
spaces; and (15) from Chapter 18.48, to landscape in accordance with submitted plan, be approved subject
to the following conditions:
02-02-04
,,__,,_. ___ ",,_u ......._.,..._....___. .__.. _........_.._____.___......_._._. ...... __. ..n_.._._"..___
-.-... ..-.-.------ ....-.--.---....
- 32-
Plannina Specific Conditions - Phase IIA (Blocks 16.18.20 and Tracts 1A. 1 B) and Phase IIC (Blocks
15. 17. 19 and 21:
1. If concurrent construction is approved for Phase IIA and Phase IIC, a concurrent
construction plan, for an approved final site-specific plan, that addresses all aspects
of Section 18.74.030.0 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance may be
submitted for review, evaluation, and consideration. No occupancy shall be permitted
until all infrastructure improvements are complete and all other conditions have been
met.
2. Maximum building height in the B-2 (Community Business District) shall be 38 feet
for a roof pitch of less than 3:12 and 44 feet for a roof pitch of 3:12 or greater in
accordance with Section 18.18.060 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
This condition will not preclude the applicant from applying for, and possibly
receiving, a Conditional Use Permit for additional height, as allowed in the B-2 district.
This requirement shall be specified in the Development Guidelines.
3. The non-residential parking requirement for site-specific plan(s) shall be based on
Section 18.46.040.B of the Bozeman Unified Development Code. A 1 O-percent
adjustment will be given in addition to the standard Community Commercial
adjustment. The additional 1 O-percent adjustment will not be given to a structure with
a maximum building height of greater than 38 feet for a roof pitch of less than 3:12
and 44 feet for a roof pitch of 3:12.
The residential parking requirement for site-specific plan(s) shall be based on Section
18.46.040.A of the Bozeman Unified Development Code.
4. Applicant(s) for site-specific plan(s) shall be required to fulfill the parking requirement
established in condition number 3, less the number of parking spaces allocated to the
specific lot through the subdivision process. These parking spaces shall be provided
prior to occupancy of the structure. Applicant may use a combination of the following
options:
Option 1. Applicant shall construct on-site parking. Construction shall
include, but n at be limited to, continuous concrete curbs, asphalt,
striping, drive approach, landscaping, and irrigation.
Option 2. Applicant shall pay cash-in-lieu to be deposited in the
escrow account established in the name of the property owners'
association for the sole purpose of providing parking. The cash-in-lieu
amount shall be based on a per space cost of a parking garage as
determined by the City of Bozeman.
5. A minimum 50-foot watercourse setback, pursuant to Section 18.42.100 of the
Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, shall be clearly delineated on the final
plan and shall include all adjacent wetlands. On-site storm water treatment facilities
may be located within the Zone 2 portion of the watercourse setback.
6. Residential uses on the ground floor may be allowed on Blocks 15, 16, 18,20 and 21.
On Blocks 17 and 19, residential uses (with the exception of apartments and
apartment buildings) shall be restricted to the second or subsequent floors.
7. All site plans with residential uses on the ground floor shall be required to meet all lot
coverage and yard requirements in accordance with Chapter 18.18 of the Bozeman
Unified Development Ordinance.
02-02-04
-- - ---.- --- . .....--.-..-
-.----. .--.-....
- 33-
Plannina SDecific Conditions - Phase liB {Blocks 9.10.11.12.13 and 14):
8. All site plans with residential uses on the ground floor shall be required to provide
landscaping in accordance with Section 18.48.060 of the Bozeman Unified
Development Ordinance.
9. If concurrent construction is approved for Phase liB, a concurrent construction plan
that addresses all aspects of Section 18.74.030.0 of the Bozeman Unified
Development Ordinance may be submitted for review, evaluation, and consideration.
No occupancy shall be permitted until all infrastructure improvements are complete
and all other conditions have been met.
10. A minimum 35-foot watercourse setback, pursuant to Section 18.42.100 of the
Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, shall be clearly delineated on the final
plan and shall include all adjacent wetlands.
11. The northernmost utility/access easements in Blocks 9 and 10 shall be a minimum
of 25 feet wide and shall include, at a minimum, a Class II trail.
Plannina SDecific Conditions - All Phases:
12. Adequate snow storage area must be designated outside the sight triangles, but on
the subject property (unless a snow storage easement is obtained for a location off
the property and filed with the County Clerk and Recorder's office).
13. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant shall provide detailed parking plans in
compliance with Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance for review and approval
by the Planning Department. These parking plans shall include full details for parking
to be constructed immediately, and preliminary details, locations, and costs for both
the surface parking required to meet the PUD minimum requirements, as well as the
proposed parking garage.
14. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant shall depict on the final site plan the
provision for handicapped accessibility, including, but not limited to, wheelchair
ramps, parking spaces, handrails, and curb cuts, signage, including dimensioned
construction details; and the applicant's certification of ADA compliance to be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Office.
15. The applicant shall submit Development Guidelines that comply with Section
18.36.070 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance for review and approval
by the Planning Office prior to final site plan approval. The Development Guidelines
shall be in an 8'1h-inch by 11-inch vertical format, permanently bound to open flat,
tabbed, and contain a table of contents.
16. The Development Guidelines shall specify that development on all lots shall be
subject to appropriate site-specific plan review in accordance with Chapter 18.34 of
the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, and that a letter of approval from the
Baxter Meadows Design Review Board shall be provided prior to approval of any site-
specific plan application.
17. The applicant shall submit a comprehensive sign plan that complies with Chapter
18.52 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance for review and approval by the
Planning Office prior to final site plan approval. The comprehensive sign plan shall
include type(s), location, design, illumination, size, height, and allocation method.
18. Prior to the construction and installation of any signage on-site, a Sign Permit
Application shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Office in accordance with
Chapter 18.52 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance, including, but not
limited to, contractor, real estate, and lending institution signs temporarily posted on-
site during and after construction of the building. A letter of approval from the Baxter
02-02-04
.-.....---..-...--.--
- 34-
Meadows Design Review Board shall be provided prior approval of any Sign Permit
Application.
19. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate at least 20
performance points pursuant to Section 18.36.090.E.2.a.(7) "Performance" of the
Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
20. Any unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as
conditions of approval, do not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the
lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State of Montana.
Planning Standard Conditions:
21. The applicant must submit seven (7) copies of a final site plan within one year of
preliminary approval containing all of the conditions, corrections, and modifications
to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Office.
22. A building permit must be obtained prior to the work and must be obtained within one
year of final site plan approval. Building permits will not be issued until the final site
plan is approved. Minor site surface preparation and normal maintenance shall be
allowed prior to submittal and approval of the final site plan, including excavation and
footing preparation, but NO CONCRETE MAY BE POURED UNTIL A BUILDING
PERMIT IS OBTAINED.
23. The applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement with the City to guarantee
the installation of required on-site improvements at the time of final site plan
submittal. If occupancy of the structure is to occur prior to the installation of all
required on-site improvements, the Improvements Agreement must be secured by
a method of security equal to one and one-half times (150%) the amount of the
estimated cost of the scheduled improvements not yet installed. Said method of
security shall be valid for a period of not less than twelve (12) months; however, the
applicant shall complete all on-site improvements within nine (9) months of
occupancy to avoid default on the method of security.
24. The applicant shall submit with the application for final plan review and approval, a
written narrative stating how each of the conditions of preliminary plan approval has
been satisfactorily addressed.
25. 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
pursuant to Section 18.34.1 00.C.1 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
26. 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 pursuant to Section
18.34.100.C.2 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance.
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.
02-02-04
- 35-
Appointments to boards and commissions: (a) Beautification Advisorv Board. (b) Board of Appeals.
(c) Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisorv Board. (d) Community Affordable Housina Advisorv Board. (e)
Design Review Board. (f) Downtown Business Improvement District Board (BID). (a) Recreation and
Parks Advisorv Board. (h) Senior Citizens' Advisorv Board. (j) Transfer of Development Rights
Citizens' Advisorv Committee. (j) Wetlands Review Board. and (k) Zonina Commission
A memo from Deputy Clerk of the Commission DeLathower, dated January 29, 2004, listing
applicants for the various boards, was included in the Commissioners' packets. Distributed just prior to the
meeting was a memo, dated February 2,2004, forwarding an additional application.
Beautification Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by
Commissioner Hietala, that Shauna Deckert be appointed to replace Laurie Simms on the Beautification
Advisory Board, with an initial term to expire on June 30,2004. 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.
Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman,
seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that Mary Martin be appointed to replace Joan Ford as a representative
of an organization providing services to low and moderate income persons on the Community Affordable
Housing Advisory Board, with an initial term to expire on June 30,2004. The motion carried by the following
Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner
Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none.
Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by
Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Yousef Zadegan be appointed to replace Steve Sparks on the Recreation and
Parks Advisory Board, with a three-year term to expire on December 31,2006. 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.
Transfer of Development Rights Citizens' Advisory Committee. It was moved by Commissioner
Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that Brian Close be appointed as a City representative
on Gallatin County's Transfer of Development Rights Citizens' Advisory Committee. The motion failed by
the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff and Commissioner
Youngman; those voting No being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, and Mayor Cetraro.
It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that J.P.
Pomnichowski be appointed as a City representative on Gallatin County's Transfer of Development Rights
Citizens' Advisory Committee. 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.
Zoning Commission. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Hietala,
that Dave Shepard be appointed to the Zoning Commission, with a two-year term to expire on January 31,
2006. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss,
Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting
No, none.
Authorize City participation in the Montana Leaaue of Cities and Towns eneray utility feasibility
study
Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Acting City Manager Brey, dated January
29, 2004.
Acting City Manager Brey stated he is seeking authorization for the City's participation in the
Montana League of Cities and Towns energy utility feasibility study. He provided background information
on the creation of the Montana Electric and Gas Alliance (MEGA), and the status of the electric and gas
utility situation in Montana. Northwestern Energy is currently moving through bankruptcy procedures, and
the cities participating in MEGA have identified a need to conduct a feasibility study to determine whether
they need to participate in the bankruptcy proceedings to protect the interests of the communities. MEGA
would like to spend $50,000 to hire the consultant who helped put together the MEGA proposal. Acting City
02-02-04
.. u____..._ _._._____.____._
- 36-
Manager Brey said he is now seeking authorization to spend an initial $5,000 for Bozeman's participation.
It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, to authorize the City
of Bozeman's participation in the Montana League of Cities and Towns energy utility feasibility study. 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.
Mid-vear budaet review for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 - Administrative Services Director Gamradt
Included the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Administrative Services Director Gamradt,
dated January 23, 2004, providing the results of the mid-year budget review.
Administrative. Services Director Gamradt reviewed his memo, noting it appears general fund
revenues are close to initial estimates. However, under enterprise funds, the Hyalite transmission main
project is over budget and will likely require the City to borrow money. Special revenue funds collection is
slightly ahead of schedule.
It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Commission
acknowledge receipt of the mid-year budget review for Fiscal Year 2003-2004. The motion carried by the
following Aye and No vote: t hose voting Aye being Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala,
Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none.
Continued work session - budaetina process for Fiscal Year 2004-2005
Included in the Commissioners' packets was a list of suggested revisions to the budgeting process,
to be incorporated into the Fiscal Year 2004-2005 process.
Administrative Services Director Gamradt stated he and Commissioner Hietala met and came to an
agreement on each one of the points listed.
Commissioner Youngman, referring to point number 2, said statistics on full-time equivalents per
10,000 population would be meaningless because City business also relates to commercial. She suggested
using equivalents per business expansion might be more meaningful. Administrative Services Director
Gamradt responded he understands that means the Commission would like to have more miscellaneous
statistics included in the bUdget.
Commissioner Youngman then inquired about point number 5. Commissioner Hietala stated he
believes it is important to have both current year and coming year information included, so one can look at
what's been done and what is going to be done. Administrative Services Director Gamradt noted that
sounds simple, but the entire document would have to be totally revamped. There will be a lot of cases
where that information won't fit onto one page.
Administrative Services Director Gamradt said he is anticipating the Commission would like to have
a discussion on the goal-setting process and suggested it would help the Commission to have a
presentation by each department, outlining their needs for the coming year. Acting City Manager Brey
agreed that would be a good way to do it and noted he and the Clerk 0 f the Commission can start
scheduling department presentations, if that is the Commission's desire.
Discussion re landfill issues
Included in the Commissioners' packets was an e-mail from Administrative Services Director
Gamradt, dated January 23, forwarding information on City/County landfill issues.
The Administrative Services Director said he wanted to update the Commission on a recent meeting
between City representatives and Commissioner Murdock, County Commissioner. They continue to try to
find some common ground regarding landfill issues. The City has landfill needs with the impending closure
of the landfill, and the County has needs since they have very little volume and management issues.
02-02-04
------ -------------------- ---- - --------------------------- -------------- ----..---.-..------.--
- 37-
Administrative Services Director Gamradt stated it would be helpful for the City if it were to start
diverting a portion of its waste to the Logan landfill to allow the closing of the City landfill to coincide with
the opening of the transfer station. The projected closing date of the City's landfill is 2005. It would probably
be most prudent to run the trucks to Logan in the summer months, rather than during the winter months.
The County has need for someone with expertise to operate their landfill, and the City has staff, who might
not have jobs at the transfer station, with that expertise. Administrative Services Director Gamradt noted
the City could either become a member of the Solid Waste District or enter into a contract with the County.
If the City enters into a contract, a tipping fee would need to be established for a specified time. If the City
becomes a member, there would need to be a provision for a way out, if the need should arise. The County
feels they have good contract employees working right now, and they have an interest in keeping those
same employees. As for whom those employees would work for is up in the air right now; it is believed
Commissioner Murdock is leaning toward having the Solid Waste District hiring employees. The County
is not interested in legislation allowing the City a majority on the Board as a means of resolving the problem,
and the City is not interested in paying for any of the closure or post-closure costs of space that is currently
filled. That is an important issue for the City because Bozeman has been able to put money aside for
acquisition of land for a transfer station, costs of building a transfer station, and cover the costs of closing
cells, including the post-closure costs; but the County hasn't done that.
Commissioner Kirchhoff questioned the viability of a County Solid Waste District without the
membership of Bozeman and Belgrade. Administrative Services Director Gamradt replied the District needs
an adequate volume to be fiscally efficient, and they would like to have those cities' volume to make that
efficiency. Commissioner Kirchhoff then asked if there is a business plan that can be reviewed because
he does not want the District to keep ramping up the volume. The Administrative Services Director stated
they did not get into that specifically, but the County is totally in agreement with the recycling philosophy of
the City.
The Administrative Services Director suggested the City shouldn't dictate what price per ton it is
willing to pay. It should be turned around so the County shows the City what the costs are of disposing of
the garbage, plus the closing and postclosure costs are, but not for those areas already occupied. The
County did react favorably to that suggestion.
Director of Public Service Arkell stated a consultant estimated the costs would be less than $20,000
with all counties participating. If Park, Madison, and Jefferson counties participate, the volume will be
higher. The Director of Public Service said she believes the City will be able to keep all current landfill
employees employed at the transfer station. She reminded the Commission that Bozeman also needs to
consider Belgrade in the decision-making because they, too, made the decision to not join the Solid Waste
District because they had similar and other concerns. Acting City Manager Brey responded that County
Commissioner Murdock has been told the City of Bozeman does not wish to act independently of the City
of Belgrade; and the Commissioner did acknowledge that.
Sanitation Superintendent Kottwitz noted 2003 was a big year for the landfill, with 92,400 tons of
waste material being taken in. 25,983 tons of that was soil from the Library site, which was put into the
class 2 area and buried. Originally it was projected the landfill would be full in 2006,;but that has been
revised downward to July, 2005, providing there are no large events. However, there are several projects
on the horizon which may impact that estimate. The Class 4 area was full, and the City has since been
approved to go higher, which should extend the life of the Class 4 area another one and a half years. The
Sanitation Superintendent noted BFI brings in 56 percent of the total volume per year, and the City needs
to work with them to keep the landfill open until the transfer station opens. Ways to extend the life of the
Class 2 area of the landfill include limiting access to the landfill or diverting waste to the Logan landfill.
Commissioner Kirchhoff noted the landfill in Bozeman has very particular neighbors who keep a
close eye on the landfill and has reported things to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality. He
asked if there are any reports on the Logan landfill. Sanitation Superintendent Kottwitz answered he has
not seen any DEQ reports on conditions at the Logan landfill.
Responding to Mayor Cetraro, Sanitation Superintendent Kottwitz said, to his knowledge, the County
hasn't sent out requests for proposals for operation of the landfill yet, and he believes they are waiting to
see where Bozeman and Belgrade are in the scheme of things. He believes the County is hoping to extend
its current contract for another year. It isn't possible for the City to take on that contract at the present time
because it would mean hiring additional staff and leasing more equipment. The County's proposal is for
the City of Bozeman to buy air space at the Logan landfill, which would give them the revenue to expand
02-02-04
----.---.-
..__...u._n___.___..._._..
- 38-
their operation. That would give the City the flexibility to keep its landfill open by diverting as much waste
as possible to Logan.
Commissioner Hietala asked how far out the opening of the transfer station is projected to be.
Sanitation Superintendent Kottwitz said his best guess scenario would be spring or summer of 2006. Each
month the City is able to divert waste, it buys time and space in the City's landfill. However, the costs of
driving to Logan aren't cheap.
Commissioner Hietala inquired about the possibility of building an outdoor loading platform at the
current landfill. The Sanitation Superintendent responded that to bring trucks to the landfill and transfer the
load to a semi would be considered a transfer station, and the City is not licensed for that. Also, the City
would only be able to haul it's own garbage, it couldn't be mixed with County garbage. Sanitation
Superintendent Kottwitz stated he has looked into leasing trucks to travel to Logan because the City trucks
are currently running at capacity, and that would cost about $3,000 per month, per truck. Each of the City
trucks runs about 66 tons per week, and one truck is budgeted for in the Capital Improvements Program,
which could possibly be moved up to 2005 to save on the leasing costs.
Commissioner Kirchhoff pointed out the Logan landfill is kind of a fixation for the City's solid waste,
but Logan is not the only place in the state that can accept the City's waste at a reasonable rate. There are
other facilities; and that needs to be put out there on the table, for both Bozeman and Belgrade to consider.
Director of Public Service Arkell said Park County did a request for proposals for solid waste disposal, and
one of the proposals was for $36 to $40 per ton with the trucks and drivers provided.
Continued discussion re selection Drocess for new City Manaaer
Included in the Commissioners' packets were copies of the advertisements published in the
Bozeman Daily Chronicle, in Jobs Available, in the Montana Group newspapers, and posted on the ICMA's
website. Also included in the packets were drafts of the screening tool and interview questions, prepared
by Human Resources Director Berg based on the Commission's discussion.
Acting City Manager Brey stated there are two tasks left for defining the process for the selection of
a new City Manager. The interview questions and screening tool need to be determined. He noted there
are area service vendors who may want to contract with the City to provide psychological profiling services
to aid in the selection process, and he encouraged the Commissioners to review those requests with staff.
Discussion - FYI Items
The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission.
(1) E-mail message from Dana Huschle, 1222 Cherry Drive, announcing the New Hyalite View
neighborhood meeting scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on February 3 at the Bozeman Public Library.
(2) E-mail message from Acting City Manager Ron Brey indicating the cost for Same Day
Delivery to deliver Commissioner packets would be $17.50 per week.
(3) Notes from the Community Alcohol Coalition meeting held on December 10, 2003.
(4) Agenda for the County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February
3, at the Courthouse.
(5) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 a.m. on
Tuesday, February 3, at the Professional Building.
(6) Agendas for the Planning Board meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. and the joint meeting of the
Planning Board and Zoning Commission to be held at 8:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 3, in the Commission
Room.
During her FYI Commissioner Youngman referred to the neighborhood meeting to be held at the
Library on February 3rd regarding sidewalks in the New Hyalite View Subdivision. She noted this is the first
02-02-04
----......--- .-------.----.--
----...-..-.---..-.
- 39-
such preparatory meeting, and it good for the community and staff alike to have these kinds of meetings.
Acting City Manager Brey presented the following during his FYI: 1) The League of Cities and Towns
is putting together a health insurance request for proposals to do something similar to the liability insurance
plan. They hope to have a consultant on board in March. 2) He recommends using Same Day Delivery to
deliver the Commission packets. Theywould only deliver to those who need to have their packets delivered
on a week by week basis. A majority of the Commission agreed to use Same Day Delivery to deliver the
packets. 3) The City was planning to move the Building Department and the City Attorney's office to the
second floor of the AI Stiff Professional Building, so all leases for current tenants have been terminated.
Costs have now been received from the architectural firm, and they are staggering. This item will need to
come before the Commission for direction. 4) Jim Paugh has been contacted regarding the roundabout on
Baxter Lane. 5) He would like the Commission to select folks to attend the economic development summit
for the seven regions surrounding big cities for discussion of an economic development package that
contains some legislative components, including the possibility of a local option tax.
Adiournment -12:30 am
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 Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none.
JJf--- ---
A L. CETRARO, Mayor
ATTEST:
~ y -e1~
R IN L. SULLIVAN
Clerk of the Commission
PREPARED BY:
\,
~&:~lcr-D~Ll~~~~-:) (J lALlA ~
Deputy Clerk of the Commission
02-02-04
-. .- ...-...-- .---.--..-.-.--. ----.--..---- .,,-- _. ._u_ ...__..... ~