The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2004-01-12 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA January 12, 2004 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, on Monday, January 12, 2004, at 3:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Andrew Cetraro, Commissioner Jeff Krauss, Commissioner Marcia Youngman, Commissioner Steve Kirchhoff, Commissioner Lee Hietala, City Manager Clark Johnson, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell, Planning Director Andy Epple, City Attorney Paul Luwe and Clerk of the Commission Robin Sullivan (for the afternoon session) and Deputy Clerk of the Commission Karen De Lath ower (for the evening session). 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. Executive session re Dersonnel At 3:05 p.m., Mayor Cetraro announced that, pursuant to Section 2-3-203(3), Montana Code Annotated, the Montana Constitution and the Montana Supreme Court rulings, he, as presiding officer, has determined that the right to privacy clearly exceeds the merits of public disclosure. He then called an executive session for the purpose of discussing personnel issues and requested that all persons except the Commissioners, City Manager, Assistant City Manager, City Attorney and the Clerk leave the room. At 3:20 p.m" Mayor Cetraro closed the executive session and reconvened the open meeting. Minutes - Januarv 5. 2004 It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the minutes of the meeting of January 5, 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 City Manager Johnson presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Authorize City Manaaerto sian - Annexation Aareement with David M. MacDonald and Chervl MacDonald - 10.70 acres described as Tracts 1A and 2A. COS No. 1855A (Iyina between West Babcock Street and West Beall Street. immediatelY west of Kirk Park) Commission Resolution No. 3648 - annexing 10.70 acres described as Tracts 1Aand 2A. COS No. 1855A (Iyina between West Babcock Street and West Beall Street. immediately west of Kirk Park) COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3648 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, PROVIDING FOR THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN CONTIGUOUS TRACTS OF LAND, HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED, TO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN AND THE EXTENSION OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN SO AS TO INCLUDE SAID CONTIGUOUS TRACTS. 01-12-04 -- ---------------------------- -. ...-..--..-----..- -.--------. ,.------.-- ._____._n___ _ - 2 - Ordinance No. 1608 - zone map amendment to establish initial municipal zonina desianations of "R-O" and "R-3" on 10.70 acres described as Tracts 1Aand 2A. COS No. 1855A (lyina between West Babcock Street and West Beall Street. immediately west of Kirk Park): provisionally adopt and brina back in two weeks for final adoption ORDINANCE NO. 1608 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY 0 F BOZEMAN ZONE MAP BYE STABLlSHING A N INITIAL ZONING DESIGNATION OF "R-O" (RESIDENTIAL OFFICE DISTRICT), AND "R-3" (RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY DISTRICT) ON 10.70 ACRES SITUATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 1 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, MONTANA PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN. Acknowledae receipt of letter from Delaney & Company. dated December 31. reaardina parkina reauirements for the 777 Buildina: refer to staff Buildina Inspection Division report for December 2003 Claims Ms. Mary Vant Hull, 416 East Story Street, expressed concern that the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board did not know during its meeting on Thursday evening that annexation of the former Lessley property would be considered at this meeting. She noted that Kirk Park is used extensively and is becoming overcrowded, and this property immediately adjacent to it would make a beautiful extension of that park. She is concerned that with dense residential development on this property, no parkland dedication will be required, and only a minimal amount of open space will be required. She acknowledged that requiring parkland dedication is probably not possible at this stage of the annexation process, but asked that staff consider such requirements in the future due to the strong need for more parkland in the community. Ms. Karin Caroline, Delaney & Company, asked for discussion of the letter regarding parking requirements for the 777 Building, stating that they have been working with Planning staff but have not been able to reach a satisfactory resolution that allows the Livingston Federal Credit Union to occupy the final tenant space in that building. She indicated that recalculation of the net square footages in the building suggest that 138 spaces are required rather than the 146 spaces previously identified; thus elimination of six parking spaces to accommodate drive-up facilities for the credit union could be accommodated. Planning Director Epple responded to the issues raised by the members of the public. He confirmed that, unless the property is subdivided or a condominium project is requested, no parkland dedication is required. He then noted that preliminary plans for development of this site suggest that the required open space would be provided in the center of the project, and staff will give Ms. Vant Hull's comments as much consideration as possible under State statute. He then turned has attention to the parking requirements for the 777 Building, stating it appears staff and the applicant are only one parking space from reaching agreement on this issue. Commissioner Youngman stated she feels the issue of parkland dedication should have been raised during the public hearing on the annexation to be considered at this time. As a result, she suggested that the Commission should approve this annexation agreement and annexation as submitted, but asked that the issue be addressed in future annexations. 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. 01-12-04 .- --------..- - 3 - Recommendation from CDBG Economic Development Loan Review Committee re repayment of loan to Advanced Manufacturina Services lAMS) Included in the Commissioners' packets was a letter from Cynthia Evans, Acting Director of the Gallatin Development Corporation, dated January 7, 2004, forwarding the recommendation from the Community Development Block Grant Economic Development Loan Review Committee regarding repayment of the loan to Advanced Manufacturing Services. Ms. Cynthia Evans, Gallatin Development Corporation, gave a brief overview of the loan under consideration. She noted that in March 1998, the Commission approved an $80,000 loan to Advanced Manufacturing Services at 6 percent interest. Unfortunately, 9/11 had a negative impact on the business and the owner is going out of business and is now in default on the loan. To close the loan, he has proposed to sell his specialized equipment and pay $16,850 to close the loan, which has slightly over $24,500 outstanding. Responding to Commissioner Hietala, Ms. Evans confirmed that, with the proposed final payment, the applicant has made payments totaling slightly in excess of $88,000, which means the fund has recouped its initial investment and realized approximately 3 percent in interest. She then indicated that the Loan Review Committee has recommended the Commission accept the applicant's offer. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Commission accept the $16,850.00 payment from Advanced Manufacturing Services as final payment and retire the Community Development Block Grant economic development loan. 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. Informal review - pre-application and concept planned unit development for The Villaae Downtown Lofts. to allow development of 144 lofts within four 5-storv buildinas on two lots - C&H Enaineerina and Bitnar Architects for The Villaae Investment Group least of Broadwav Avenue. at East Mendenhall Street extended) lZ-03287) Included in the Commissioners' packets was a pre-application and concept planned unit development for The Village Downtown Lofts, as submitted by C&H Engineering and Bitnar Architects for The Village Investment Group under Application No. Z-03287. Contract Planner Lanette Windemaker gave an overview of the project, which includes the development of 144 lofts within four 5-story buildings. She stated that a subterranean garage is proposed under each set of two buildings, although those garages would not provide adequate on-site parking for the units. She noted that, under the unified development ordinance, on-street parking can be counted toward the parking requirements; however, there is a potential that a waiver would still be needed from the parking requirements. Also, she stated the maximum height allowed under the existing zoning is 34 feet; and the applicant is proposing significantly taller structures. Ms. Karin Caroline, Delaney and Company, stated this is the second development proposal within The Village Downtown, with the first development being 32 townhouses. She indicated there are to be 36 units in each building, with the buildings being between 65 and 75 feet tall, depending on the type of material used for construction and the height of the walls in the units. She indicated that the Locati building on East Main Street is 43 feet tall, and the information provided includes a depiction of how these proposed buildings would relate to that structure. She then noted that 124 parking spaces are being proposed in the garages, and a calculation of on-street parking spaces will determine whether a relaxation is needed. Ms. Caroline reminded the Commission that the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan encourages higher density close to the downtown core; and this project would do that. She suggested that it would be a nice enhancement to the entryway corridor. Perimeter landscape buffering is proposed, including up to 30 feet within the 100-foot railroad right-of-way; and the applicant is working with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust on the trestle trail system. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Ms. Caroline indicated the subject property is approximately 20 to 25 feet higher than the interstate. She reminded the Commissioners of the distance between this property and the interstate, noting the proposed development cannot be located anywhere else 01-12-04 -...-...--.-..- - 4 - on the site because of the underground garage and the groundwater levels and wetlands on the remainder of the subject property. Responding to Mayor Cetraro, Ms. Caroline confirmed the applicant is seeking feedback on the parking and height issues, along with any other thoughts from the Commissioners. Mayor Cetraro indicated he has no problem with the proposed parking. Responding to questions from Commissioner Krauss, Ms. Caroline confirmed that land to the north and northeast can be developed, and stressed that there is to be residential development only within this project. She then indicated that area is 15 to 20 feet lower than the area where these lofts are being proposed. She noted that a relaxation has been granted for the height of the townhouses currently under construction; and they are to be up to 42 feet tall. Commissioner Youngman requested a thoughtful Design Review Board discussion regarding the height of high-density housing and the relationship of that height to other topographical features and buildings in the immediate area as well as the downtown. She indicated her support of the project as presented in its conceptual form. She noted, however, that she wants to avoid any surprises, such as the height and mass of the five-story addition currently under construction at the hospital. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Ms. Caroline indicated the uncertainty about materials to be used pertains to the superstructure only. She noted the exterior will be brick and stone, similar to the old brownstone theme. Mr. Thomas Bitnar, architect, stated that the project will follow the color of the brick buildings along Main Street. He noted that the architecture of the buildings will include setback tops and cornices, similar to Fred Willson's architecture. He noted that the exterior will not necessarily follow an ornamental or historic style but will be appropriate for the area, creating an extension of the downtown appearance. He stated that, while the exterior will have a city feeling, the interior will have a Montana feeling that will extend into the courtyard area. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Mr. Bill Muhlenfield, applicant, confirmed that the townhouses will start at $460,000. These village loft style condominiums will range from studio to three- bedroom units, containing roughly 800 to 2,500 square feet. To date, no price point has been identified, but he noted they should be more affordable than the townhouses. Mayor Cetraro thanked the applicant for submitting this application for review. Selection of Actina City Manaaer City Manager Johnson noted that an Acting City Manager should be selected to serve between his departure tomorrow and the arrival of a new City Manager. He reminded the Commission that Assistant City Manager Ron Brey served in that capacity prior to his arrival. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that Assistant City Manager Ron Brey be appointed as Acting City Manager during the period between City Manager Johnson's departure and the arrival of the new City Manager. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Kirchhoff and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Discussion re selection Drocess for new City Manaaer Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Clerk of the Commission Sullivan, dated January 8, 2004, forwarding information on the hiring process used for appointment of a City Manager in 1997. City Manager Johnson encouraged the Commissioners to establish a selection process that moves forward as quickly as possible, including a short advertising period with publication in Montana newspapers 01-12-04 - ----------------------- ..----.-------- - 5 - only. He also suggested the Commission ask Human Resources Director Pattie Berg to help write a hiring plan, which will ensure consistency in the process. Commissioner Youngman noted that a list of standardized interview questions was not included in the packet of information provided, and suggested that additional information from the previous process could be beneficial. Mayor Cetraro noted that the class specification needs to be revised. Human Resources Director Pattie Berg stated the class specification was prepared by Yarger/ Decker three years ago, based on information provided by City Manager Johnson, with input from Commissioner Youngman, who was serving as Mayor at that time. She stressed that reviewing and adjusting the class specification, if necessary, is the first step in the hiring process, with the next step being advertising. She noted that the Job Service then handles receiving the applications for the City; and then she picks up the process. City Manager Johnson noted the only item on which he and Commissioner Youngman disagreed was the requirement for a Master's degree. He suggested that the degree should not be mandatory; rather, a combination of education and experience should be allowed as an alternative. Human Resources Director Pattie Berg stated that class specifications are designed to allow a variety of options and are more free flowing than job descriptions. She suggested that, under the class specification as written, the Commission could consider an applicant who, it appears, could perform the duties even if that individual does not meet all of the qualifications listed. Commissioner Krauss expressed concern that, the way it is written, the class specification currently requires a Master's degree; and he feels that should be revised if the degree is not mandatory. Mayor Cetraro stated he does not believe an advanced degree should be part of the criteria. Commissioner Krauss stated he has no problem with including an advanced degree; he feels that experience should be allowed as a substitute for the degree. Commissioner Hietala expressed his concurrence. Commissioner Hietala indicated a statement should be included that requires the City Manager to live within city limits. Human Resources Director Pattie Berg asked if the successful applicant is to be a resident upon appointment 0 r if the Commission wishes to provide for a delay if needed; following discussion, the Commissioners agreed that the City Manager must be a resident by his or her first performance review Responding to Mayor Cetraro, Human Resources Director Berg stated the next steps are to provide any additional feedback on the class specification; determine if the search is to be national or local and for how long; determine what materials the applicant is required to provide; determine whether the standard City of Bozeman application for employment form is to be used; and establish the pay range. City Attorney Luwe suggested that establishing a pay range is not necessary. He suggested, rather, that the Commission choose its top candidate and then negotiate the salary. If a satisfactory package cannot be negotiated, the Commission can then move to its next candidate. Commissioner Krauss noted that people often call to find out the salary of the current City Manager if they are interested in a position and suggested that information should be included, even if a pay range is not established. He then suggested that the starting salary of the new City Manager may not be as high as some of the other current employees. Mayor Cetraro expressed his support for that approach, noting that City Manager Johnson has raised the bar locally and has received a salary commensurate with that. Responding to Mayor Cetraro, City Manager Clark Johnson confirmed that, when he accepted this position, it was at a salary less than former City Manager Jim Wysocki was making. He then noted that, for 01-12-04 __.________."._____.. "'., .n., ....__ ._. __ ______ ---- .-.------.--------- ------- ..... ------.-..-----.----...-.---..-.-- - 6 - him, it was not the salary, it was the position that held the interest. He indicated that some initial applicants may drop out when they find out what salary is being paid for the position. Responding to questions from Commissioner Kirchhoff, Assistant City Manager Ron Brey stated he has seen solicitations with a statement that the "7 year incumbent is making x". He noted that type of statement implies that after seven years' time, the incumbent has built the salary to that level as well as giving applicants a glimpse of what might be a starting salary. The Commissioners concurred that would be the appropriate approach to take in this recruitment process. Human Resources Director Berg asked the Commissioners what type of information they wish to receive, cautioning that each step causes another delay in the process. She noted that during the last recruitment process, a cover letter and resume were required, after which responses were sought to supplementary questions. Commissioner Youngman asked if the Commission wishes to ask two or three questions that are to be included in the initial submittal. She then stated that an application is redundant to a resume. Mayor Cetraro voiced his strong preference for an application form, noting it puts the information into a standard format for ease of review and evaluation. Human Resources Director Berg noted that the questions could be included as a supplement to the application. Commissioner Kirchhoff voiced his interest in including supplementary questions, noting one of those could be describing three critical elements the applicant could bring to Bozeman. Human Resources Director Berg noted that an applicant could also be asked to describe how he or she meets the qualifications; that gives those without a Master's degree an opportunity to describe their qualifications and sell themselves. Commissioner Youngman suggested that each Commissioner think of questions for a supplemental form; Commissioner Kirchhoff indicated his concurrence and asked that each Commissioner submit two questions. Mayor Cetraro asked if the Commission wants to undertake a national, regional or local search and how long the applications should remain open. Mayor Cetraro and Commissioner Kirchhoff expressed support for a local search, with a 3D-day response time. Commissioner Youngman suggested the search be expanded to include a tri-state area or the Intermountain West, possibly including Wyoming, Colorado, Idaho and Washington. She also noted that three weeks from the publishing of the notice may be an appropriate deadline. The Commissioners also discussed the possibility of a national search, to include the ICMA and the National League of Cities publications. Assistant City Manager Brey indicated he will have information on deadlines for advertisements to present at next week's meeting. Commissioner Krauss suggested that the application forms could be posted on the City's website for those interested in downloading and completing them. Assistant City Manager Brey cautioned that downloads can be interrupted and an applicant may submit an incomplete application as a result. It was determined that e-mailing the information to potential applicants may be a better way to ensure the full application is received. Mayor Cetraro asked that this item be placed on next week's agenda for further discussion and Commission direction. 01-12-04 . -----".........-.....- --------.- - 7 - Selection of Mayor Pro Tempore Mayor Cetraro noted that the incoming Mayor is typically appointed as Mayor Pro Tempore for the previous two years. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Commissioner Krauss be appointed as the Mayor Pro Tempore for Calendar Years 2004 and 2005. 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. Appointments to various boards and commissions: (a) Audit Committee: (b) Band Board: (c) Board of Appeals: (d) Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board: (e) City-County Board of Health: (f) City Plannina Board: (a) Desian Review Board: (h) Downtown Bozeman Improvement District Board (lDB): en Downtown Business Improvement District Board (BID): (j) Fire Code Board of Appeals: (k) Historic Preservation Advisory Board: (I) Recreation and Parks Advisory Board: (m) Senior Citizens' Advisory Board: (n) Transfer of Development Riahts Citizens' Advisory Committee: (0) Transportation Coordinatina Committee: (D) Wetlands Review Board: (a) Zonina Commission Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Deputy Clerk of the Commission DeLat~o~er, dated January 8, 2004, forwarding the list of applicants for the various boards and commiSSions. Audit Committee; Band Board; Board of Appeals; Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that Sue Becker be reappointed to the Audit Committee, with a two-year term to expire on February 28, 2006; that Charles McGuire and Ron Schimpf be reappointed to the Band Board, with three-year terms to expire on December 31, 2006; that Gene Brooks be reappointed to the Board of Appeals, with a three-year term to expire on December 31, 2006; and that David Baumbauer, Susan Gallagher, Jon Henderson and Jim Nallick be reappointed to the Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board with two-year terms to expire on December 31, 2005; and that Robert Hamlin and Tiffany Lach be reappointed and Paul Ridgely be appointed to replace Andy Dziadosz, with one-year terms to expire on December 31, 2004. 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. City-County Board of Health. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that Dennis Alexander be reappointed as the City's citizen representative on the City- County Board of Health, with a three-year term to expire on January 8,2007. 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. City Planning Board. Mayor Cetraro appointed Sarah Guggenheim, Mike Hope, Dave Jarrett and Sunny McGee to replace Cliff Chisholm, Brian Close, Joe Frost and Ed Musser as Mayoral appointments to the City Planning Board, all with two-year terms to begin on February 1,2004, and expire on January 31, 2006; and accepted the reappointment of Mark Evans as the County representative, contingent upon official notification and confirmation by the County Commission. Commissioner Youngman expressed concern about Mr. Hope's past attendance on the Zoning Commission and asked for assurance that his attendance record will improve with his appointment to the City Planning Board. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that Harry Kirschenbaum and Ed Musser be appointed to replace Brian Gallik and Sarah Guggenheim and that J.P. Pomnichowski be reappointed as Commission appointees, with two-year terms to begin on February 1, 2004, and expire on January 31, 2006. 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. Design Review Board. There were no qualified applicants for the architectural historian vacancy on this board. 01-12-04 ------------- .------ . --...- ...... - --... .-- - 8- Downtown Bozeman Improvement District Board (IDB). It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that Jarvis Brown be appointed to replace Bert Hopeman as a non- voting member, 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 Krauss, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Downtown Business Improvement District Board (BID). No applications were on file for this board. Fire Code Board of Appeals. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that Gene Brooks be reappointed to the Fire Code Board of Appeals, 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 Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Historic Preservation Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Bart Manion be appointed to replace Todd Wilkinson as an at-large member, 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 Hietala, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Krauss and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Recreation and Parks Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Sandy Dodge and Kate Gardner be reappointed and that David Cook be appointed to replace Sandy Appleby, with three-year terms 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. Senior Citizens' Advisory Board. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Joyce Hynes be appointed to replace Shirley Powell on the Senior Citizens' Advisory Board, with a two-year term to expire on December 31,2005. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Transfer of Development Rights Citizens' Advisory Committee. No applications are on file for this committee. Transportation Coordinating Committee. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that David Smith be appointed to replace Mark Haggerty on the Transportation Coordinating Committee, with a two-year term to expire on December 31, 2005. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: t hose v oting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Krauss and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No, none. Wetlands Review Board. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Elizabeth Crowe be appointed as a plant scientist, Mary McFadzen be appointed as a biologist, Lynn Bacon be appointed as a soil scientist, Ron LeCain be appointed as a plant scientist, and that Steve O'Neil be appointed as a hydrologist on the newly-formed Wetlands Review Board. 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 Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that Mark Evans and Sunny McGee be appointed to replace Joe Frost and Mark Haggerty on the Zoning Commission, with two-year terms to begin on February 1, 2004 and expire on January 31, 2006. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Kirchhoff and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No being Commissioner Youngman and Commissioner Krauss. Appointments of Commissioner liaisons and members to various boards Included in the Commissioners' packets was a listing of the various boards. As a result of discussion, the Commissioners concurred in the following appointments: 01-12-04 ----------. --.-------..-----------.-- ...- ..-.. _ _ ____n ---- - 9- Member/ 2004-2005 Board Liaison Appointee(s) Audit Committee Member Kirchhoff, Cetraro Band Board Liaison Krauss Beautification Advisory Board Liaison Hietala Board of Adjustment Liaison INACTIVE Board of Appeals Liaison Youngman Bicycle Advisory Board Liaison Kirchhoff Cemetery Board Liaison Youngman City-County Board of Health Member Cetraro City Planning Board Member Krauss Community Affordable Housing Liaison Hietala, Youngman (A) Community Alcohol Coalition Liaison Youngman CDBG Economic Development Liaison Krauss Design Review Board Liaison Hietala Downtown Improvement District Board Liaison Hietala Downtown Business Improvement District Liaison Hietala Fire Board of Appeals Liaison Cetraro Gallatin Development Corporation Liaison ROTATION Historic Preservation Advisory Board Liaison Youngman InterNeighborhood Council Liaison Kirchhoff, Krauss and Youngman (A) Library Board of Trustees Liaison Youngman, Hietala (A) Local Water Quality District Board Member Hietala Parking Commission Liaison Kirchhoff Pedestrian/Traffic Safety Committee Liaison Kirchhoff Recreation and Parks Advisory Board Liaison Krauss Senior Citizens' Advisory Board Liaison Hietala Tax Increment Financing Industrial District Board Liaison INACTIVE Transportation Coordinating Committee Member Cetraro Tree Advisory Board Liaison Krauss Victim Witness Liaison Cetraro Zoning Commission Liaison Kirchhoff Recess - 5:35 p.m. Mayor Cetraro recessed the meeting at 5:35 p.m., to reconvene at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of conducting the scheduled public hearings and completing the routine business items. Reconvene - 7:00 D.m. Mayor Cetraro reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Reconsideration of Commission Resolution No. 3647 - adoptina bv reference the Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan City Manager Johnson reminded the Commission that three of the Commissioners had requested that this item be placed on the agenda. Assistant Planner Kozub was present to respond to any Commission questions there might be. Commissioner Hietala stated he is the Commissioner responsible for requesting this item be brought forward for reconsideration. A year ago, when a development proposal came forward, his concern at that time was that this seemed to be a secluded development. He said he was interested in determining if there were going to be some other landowners who wanted to develop who would also be landlocked. As it turned out, this information quest resulted in the development of, and vote on, a sub-area planning effort. Commissioner Hietala continued by saying this is staff's first attempt at a sub-area master plan; and as it came close to conclusion, he believes staff was favoring Alternative 2 until the Planning Board developed 01-12-04 - -- -- --- -.--------- ..------ .. ._.__..___"..n___.______ - 10 - the Preferred Alternative. Several property owners expressed their dissatisfaction with the plan, which is why he requested its reconsideration. Commissioner Krauss acknowledged there has been a lot of work done on this plan, and he encourages the development of trails and public access to the riparian corridor. He said he would like to salute and thank those in the neighborhood who are willing to donate those accesses. This sub-area plan is designed to shape the growth and development of the subject area; however, the City has a macro-plan, which is the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Commissioner Krauss said he is wondering if this plan presents a well-developed strategy for implementation. Commissioner Youngman suggested it might be more helpful to the public to hear an alternative proposal, if there is one, before they testify. Mayor Cetraro agreed with Commissioner Krauss' comments, stating he believes this sub-area master plan should be more concise and clear in outlining where this area is headed in the future. This plan needs to be more defined and needs to go back to the drawing board for more clarity for the landowners and others affected. Commissioner Krauss said he doesn't necessarily support another alternative, but he does support more work on section 5.2 - Implementation Strategies. He wants to see an implementation plan, rather than an implementation strategy. Hew ould a Iso like to see some delineation 0 f t he trail 0 r conservation easements, rather than focusing on strategies, which include substantial requirements. Commissioner Krauss stated those are not neighborhood plans, rather they are substantial policy requirements and should not be the focus of the neighborhood plan. This plan should be more detailed than the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Commissioner Krauss reiterated he is very much in favor of trails, easements, and access to riparian habitat, but he would like more concrete details. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked Planning Director Epple if this plan changes the zoning designations, as shown on the Preferred Alternative and recommended by the Planning Board. Planning Director Epple responded it does not. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked the Planning Director if this Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan changes the order of priority of the Capital Improvements Program, to which Planning Director Epple replied it does not. Commissioner Kirchhoff then asked Planning Director Epple if this plan restricts the development rights of any property owner in this planning area. Planning Director Epple answered there was that concern, but staff was directed to make revisions to clarify existing zoning and property rights are not to be abridged in any way. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked the Planning Director what this plan does. Planning Director Epple responded this plan is to set forth a vision for open space and conservation values to be promoted and enhanced through time, and the plan identifies different strategies to accomplish that. That does not put the City in a leadership role to acquire conservation easements; it leaves the neighborhood to take the lead. It also identifies some tools that might be used to achieve that goal. The Planning Director noted this plan is setting forth a visionary focus for conservation along the corridor. It also shows street connections that might be necessary if the conservation alternative does not come to fruition. The plan attempts to provide a vision for the area while allowing property owners their rights. Commissioner Krauss asked if this is a neighborhood vision or a neighborhood plan. Planning Director Epple answered there is a little bit of inherent conflict that becomes apparent in the Preferred Alternative in that there are R3A areas overlaid with development rights that are less desirable than the conservation value. This plan doesn't provide a clear roadmap; it say open space and conservation are desirable if they can be paid for. If people choose to propose development in areas where development rights exist, it could have a very different future. Alternative 2 was more specific and went a step toward the fine grain in defining roads, cross streets, where development could occur, and where the resource values could occur. Commissioner Krauss pointed out the Planning Director said zoning will not affected by this plan, but it says development in the study area must be reviewed as a Planned Unit Development. That appears to be a change in zoning and in the zoning requirement. Planning Director Epple replied City zoning regulations for the past seven or eight years have said RS-zoned land can only be developed through the Planned Unit Development process. Commissioner Krauss noted there is other zoning in this area, as well; and the plan doesn't say that process is restricted to RS-zoned land. So, to implement this, the zoning would have to be changed. 01-12-04 --.....".........-- - 11 - Assistant Planner Kozub pointed out that is one possible implementation strategy. If the Commission wishes to pursue that, Planning staff can; but this plan doesn't require all development to go through the Planned Unit Development process. Associate Planner Sanford added that is something the Planning Board subcommittee wanted included as an implementation strategy, similar to the Oak Street/North 19th Avenue plan. The Planned Unit Development process is a good tool to get the extra sensitive development that is needed in this area. Commissioner Krauss noted the second strategy is to amend the official zoning map, as needed. He believes there are too many ambiguities in this plan. Commissioner Youngman noted the Planned Unit Development process wasn't in effect for the North 19th Avenue corridor until the ordinance was enacted. So there is another step that needs to be undertaken before it becomes a requirement for implementation. Associate Planner Sanford stated if the Preferred Alternative were implemented, then the zoning map should be changed to reflect that area that isn't available for development, but rather for conservation. Planning Director Epple pointed out a substantial portion of the study area lies outside of city limits; and as it is annexed, it will need to be rezoned. Commissioner Hietala said there still seems to be some confusion in his mind as to what land can actually be developed in this area. He asked what the sewage system capacity really is in that area. It is his understanding there was an engineering study a few years ago that indicated 200 new units could be built with the current system. He questioned why some of that potential can't be reflected in one of the alternatives. Commissioner Hietala also questioned the limits of development potential without creating such an impact that there needs to be connecting streets between South Church Avenue and South Rouse Avenue. Commissioner Krauss questioned what this Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan does. He stated it is not a regulatory plan, nor is it a fine-grained plan that outlines how development in this area is going to occur. Commissioner Krauss asked how this plan is going to assist the Planners or the Commission in addressing development proposals that come before them. Planning Director Epple replied this plan is detailed on a scale that is unattainable in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. This plan significantly increases the grain of information people have available to them. Versions of this plan other than the Preferred Alternative identify areas where development could occur, like the higher ground. They also show possible future road connections, and a possible north/south local street that the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan or the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2001 Update cannot show. Planning Director Epple continued by saying this plan gives the Commission and City staff the ability to evaluate development proposals against development and conservation issues. I f someone were proposing a development which would require a local street, staff and the Commission could look at this plan and see a street could be provided there. Otherwise, they would be required to look at the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan, which has not examined this area in that kind of detail. This plan is much more detailed than the existing ones. Commissioner Kirchhoff stated that when he voted to adopt this plan, he thought he was adopting the Preferred Alternative, with its graphic depiction of this area. He thought he was voting in favor of something that was desired by this neighborhood. Commissioner Kirchhoff said he didn't believe the Commission was voting to pass a certainty, rather he thought they were voting on a vision for this area. He pointed out this plan can only be realized by an agreement that this is the vision the neighborhood wants to realize. Development rights can be realized or those rights will be purchased or some kind of development right transfer can occur. A lot of things need to fall in line before this plan can work, and money is the large part of this plan that is not being discussed. Commissioner Youngman said she viewed adopting this plan as the first step in letting folks know this is what can occur here and to set the stage for a timeline that needs to be developed for any fundraising that needs to occur. She stated she sees this plan as a vision for the future of this area, showing people it is worth organizing and making these things happen. Commissioner Youngman stated if part of the 01-12-04 -.. ---.------..-.--.----..--..---. ----------.------ -.- - - 12 - Commissioners' reservations is the need for a specific timeline, she supports the need for more specificity now that the general plan has been approved. This plan provides a defined foundation for the future in order to mobilize people to do their part. The City's part is fairly simple compared to the neighborhood's part. Defining that partnership needs to be done soon as the next step to make this a practical plan rather than a theoretical one. Commissioner Krauss noted he was at the meeting where it was expressed by the Neighborhood Association that the City must carry the ball on this project. It needs to be clarified that the landowners may not support this plan if the City isn't going to spearhead these efforts. He then asked if a property owner has development plans for the area depicted in green on the illustration, does that make the area ambiguous; and if so, this plan has created that. Planning Director Epple responded Alternative 2 balances the conservation and resource interests with development interests without as much ambiguity. The City's Grants Administrator has been conducting extensive ongoing searches for possible grant dollars for appraising conservation easements, riparian corridors, and so forth. There is not a lot of money available; and the reality is the public probably won't be able to come up with the dollars required to protect natural resources. Therefore, Alternative 2 might be more of a reality. Brock Albin, 306 South 8th Avenue, said he is very happy the Commission is at least considering relooking at this plan. He is concerned when the City decides what the vision should be for property owned by 13 people. He suggested giving the landowners four months to create a way to develop their land that will protect the conservation area and give the surrounding landowners four months to help buy 0 ut development rights that the landowners may be willing to sell. At the end of the four months, the landowners would come to Planning staff with their plan, and then the Planning Office could give them direction if their plan would work or not. Mr. Albin said he believes most landowners, if not all, are interested in preserving the beauty and open space of this area. He suggested the Commissioners should look at something closer to the Alternative 2 plan, or perhaps they could say the Commission is leaning toward something in the middle. Mr. Albin stated the most important thing is what these 13 landowners want, and the City needs to be willing to give the landowners something in exchange for their land. The City needs to honor the requests of the landowners and make this a give and take proposal. Frank Munshower, 1407 South Bozeman Avenue and representing the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association, noted that at a previous meeting the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association stated they support the Planning Board's first alternative, but this was by a majority vote, not a unanimous one. On December 2, 2003 the Association met and was able to get the group to agree to a single statement. Thirty one people agreed unanimously that they were generally in favor of the plan proposed by the Planning Department with the following stipulations: clarification of the location of the 21-inch sewer trunk line; compensation of property owners in a timely manner and on an individual basis; help in finding funding for the plan by the City, Gallatin County, the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, the homeowners, the Open Space Lands Board, and a Special I mprovement District; elimination of the east/west connector streets; and no increased traffic on South Church Avenue. This meeting included many of the landowners who intend to develop their property. The Association believes there must be compromise, and they believe the landowners have agreed they want development with Alternative 1. Sarah Guggenheim, City Planning Board member and member of the subcommittee who worked on this plan, said there have been a lot of questions raised; and she would like to provide her thoughts on this before the Commission takes the step of rescinding this plan. This plan was not rushed; full public comment and input was received. The process took into consideration people's concerns and reasonable compromise positions are reflected in this plan. She cautioned the Commissioners to think carefully before rescinding something that was very time consuming and required a significant use of resources for all involved. Ms. Guggenheim stated that if this plan is rescinded, clear guidelines for how to proceed next and a timeframe should be included. The implementation and feasibility concerns raised by several of the Commissioners are the most legitimate criticisms of this plan. However, no ambitious conservation plan will ever have any chance of implementation without the clear support of both the public and the Commission. Ms. Guggenheim said her recommended approach to determine the cost and feasibility of such a plan would be to appoint a task force and give its members a very specific timeframe. Art Thompson, 3150 West Graf Street, #9 and member of Save Bozeman Creek and Sourdough Trail Coalition, read into record the Coalition's public comments. Mr. Thompson read their group supports the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, the conservation alternative, as adopted. They fully recognize that 01-12-04 ....._.___n.__.. .....___.___ -.--.----... -.."'.. - 13 - rapid and unprecedented growth and development is placing an increasing and visible demand on Bozeman Creek and the City's surface water and groundwater resources. The rapidly changing land uses along Bozeman Creek threaten the quality and quantity of both surface and subsurface waters and drainage and capacity of this floodplain. Protection and enhancement of the Bozeman Creek watershed is critical for a healthy environment. More open space, more parks, and more trails will preserve the natural character of this resource and protect its beauty, wildlife habitat, and viewsheds for future generations. Members of the Coalition then stood to show their support. Carl Esbjornson, 236 Marilyn Court, said he wanted to go on record as being in strong opposition to rescinding this plan or quibbling it to death. There needs to be a plan for future growth and development of this area. He said he is intrigued by the changes in accounting procedures to include intellectual property and other intangibles, and this is an intangible asset that is valuable to the community. Mr. Esbjornson said he is disturbed that measures that enhance these intangibles are being considered to be rescinded. Bill Phillips, 1629 South Church AvenUe, said his land won't have any development value after this property becomes a park, according to his bankers. Mr. Phillips said he has been working on this project for 20 years; and he would be happy to turn this area into a park, but he wants to be paid for it and he can't wait for two years for that to happen. He said someone needs to step up and do something because he has offered this property to the city twice. Mr. Phillips recognized that everyone wants a park in this area, but he is not willing to give his land away, and he believes he should be paid fairly for it. Mr. Phillips commended the Planning Department and everyone else for their efforts in the development of this plan. Bart Manion, 425 East Lincoln Street noted they are proposing minimum density development on their property; and he questioned how they could depend on this document. They have spent close to $20,000, and they are not anywhere close to developing their property. They were told to wait until this plan was completed. Mr. Manion said they have a plan developed with their neighbors, and they want to make that happen. McRay Evans will donate three-quarters of his property if the City will allow him to build a retirement home on his property. However, the Evans' cannot wait a year or two; they need an answer within six months. Forty cottonwood trees were saved in this area because the Evans' donated their land. Mr. Manion stated they want to work with the Commission on any alternative plan they may choose to adopt, but they deserve clear-cut decisions on what they can do with their property. Doris Heckerman, 1815 Sourdough Road, noted she owns 20 acres of the 100 acres being considered. This vision the neighborhood has had is not a selfish one; they would like to do this for the future of Bozeman. The City has planners that can tell people where it is a good place to build and where it is impossible. The pioneers didn't have that luxury so they built a ditch, which is Bozeman Creek. Ms. Heckerman said ditches shouldn't be built in a conservation area. There should be a pond in her field, not in people's basements on Rouse Avenue, from Bozeman Creek overflowing in the spring. When water comes down off the mountain, it is going through Bozeman, whether through her field or through others' basements. There is a tremendous loss to those people when water isn't respected. There have been many intelligent people who have spent a billion hours on this plan, the Commission has voted to adopt it, and that is democracy. Ms. Heckerman closed by saying she violently opposes rescinding what the Commission has already approved. Jaclyn Katz, 405 Ice Pond Road, said she hopes Commissioner Krauss has read the minutes from the previous meetings. As a resident and business person, she is asking the Commission to please not rescind what has already been approved. If the connector streets are installed, the traffic will pour onto Church Street, which cannot handle the traffic. Ms. Katz stated that if the few develop their property, it will be at the expense of a great many others who will not benefit. She also said she doesn't think the neighbors should be expected to buyout the development rights; that should be the responsibility of the entire city. Ms. Katz suggested the Commission needs to take the long view of the asset that is this long corridor; it needs to be preserved, as do the property rights of the many people there. Brian Close, 406 East Olive Street, noted he was one of the subcommittee members who worked on this plan; and he would like to address Commissioner Krauss' concerns. Mr. Manion and his neighbors' plans will not be stopped. This plan will affect Mr. Manion's plan through trading, and other development alternatives will effect Mr. Manion's property the same way. No one is proposing to give anyone free green space, and connecting streets will become less necessary the more the community works together. This corridor is a resource for the entire city, and the City needs to consider Special Improvement Districts and exchanging mutual easements between neighboring property owners; there are plenty of alternatives. Mr. Close stated the next step the Commission should take is the creation of a task force and allocate adequate 01-12-04 ------- _...._...___._..u_.._ - 14- staff to help. He closed by saying if Mr. Manion wants to stop the uncertainty, the Commission should let this plan stand and not rescind it. Chuck Payden, 507 Ice Pond Road, stated his concern is the proposed through streets. He has put over 100 to 200 hours into this issue alone, and staff has put in tens of thousands of hours on this project. This is the best compromise that can be reached at this time. Mr. Payden said he supports keeping the document as passed, even though it is not a perfect document. Rescinding this plan will put everyone back to where they were a year ago, and this plan is the basis for moving forward. It isn't possible to go back without losing everything everyone has worked so hard to achieve. Mr. Payden stated he also is concerned about making this plan fine-grained because it will become more controversial if that is done. Berit Manion, 425 East Lincoln Street, said her main concern is that she feels very uncomfortable with a document that doesn't acknowledge the existence of her home and her neighbors' home. Therefore, she doesn't know what to believe, and she doesn't trust this document. Ms. Manion acknowledged this plan is a work in progress, and she respects the amount of time spent on it; but she wants to be respected as a property owner, and she doesn't believe she has gotten that respect. Ms. Manion said she believes she has been ignored in this process, but she doesn't believe those opposing the plan have been. Ms. Manion stated she believes the majority of property owners oppose this plan because of the property rights issues. She reminded the Commission this is private property that is being discussed. Joe Frost, 1816 South Rouse Avenue, stated he has the most beautiful back yard in this city because his property backs up to this corridor. He said he has long realized this is private property and it is going to be developed, but it must be developed to meet the needs of this corridor. Mr. Frost acknowledged that a lot of work has gone into this plan; suggesting the process needs to be renewed, taking into account the new ideas expressed. It is time for everyone to work together to make this corridor a real blessing to this community. Mr. Frost said the Commission needs to adopt this plan and move forward; if not, it has failed the community. Ted Lange, Gallatin Valley Land Trust, said he has followed this process since the beginning. In August, the Gallatin Valley Land Trust Board had a long talk about this project and whether or not they should take this project on because there are some big obstacles. Their decision was this is a special place for Bozeman, as well as a public safety element for pedestrians and bicyclists as an alternative to traveling South Church Avenue. Mr. Lange noted the Gallatin Valley Land Trust understands this vision is hypothetical. There is a real urgency with the landowners because their development issues are much more immediate. The infrastructure barriers provide more time for thought and discussion. Mr. Lange stated this project needs the City's endorsement for it to work. Commissioner Krauss noted the Gallatin Valley Land Trust has offered their assistance if the Preferred Alternative is adopted; and asked if some other alternative is adopted, will Gallatin Valley Land Trust still work for trails in this area. Mr. Lange responded they will be involved in the trail portion, but other portions such as open space is a whole other matter. Commissioner Krauss then asked if there are any conservation easements already existing in this area. Mr. Lange responded there are two trail easements with buffers. Gallatin Valley Land Trust has talked with most of the landowners, some of whom are in favor of donating their property while others want to be wholly compensated for easements. Jon Gerster, 719 North Wallace Avenue and InterNeighborhood Council president, noted it takes effort for neighborhoods to organize. The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association has stepped up to organize around this issue, and that effort should be taken very seriously. This group has given the City what it wants: dialog, cooperation, and compromise. Now they need the opportunity to go forward. Mr. Gerster said to rescind this plan would be very damaging to the process at this point, and it jeopardizes any future organizing efforts in this town because people's attitudes will be it won't be worth their effort. He requested the Commission respect the process, the property owners, and the neighborhood organization by not rescinding this plan. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, to rescind Commission Resolution No. 3647, adopting by reference the Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan. Commissioner Krauss stated he has done the homework and has attended meetings regarding this 01-12-04 - - ....._ .._... ._n._.__.__.. ....___._.__.______.__..__...__... --...-...- - 15 - plan, and he doesn't view this motion to rescind quite as dire as it has been expressed. He said he does have sympathy for the idea the plan should go forward with the conservation alternative, but he doesn't see how it can go forward and still solve the ambiguities. Commissioner Krauss noted the neighborhood supports this plan provided the City provide the location of the trunk line, collaborative funding for land, timely payments to landowners, and remove the east/west proposed connector streets. Commissioner Krauss said he believes if the Commission accepts this plan, they will also be accepting the neighborhood's conditions. However, he does agree with the idea this plan needs to move forward, but there needs to be movement forward in showing how the proposed green space is going to be implemented. Commissioner Hietala said he doesn't believe the Commission is rescinding this plan, rather they are going to send it back to Planning staff to make the vision look more like what the potential outcome will be down the road. He doesn't believe the illustrative for the Preferred Alternative reflects the true outcome, and he believes it should. Commissioner Hietala stated he believes the illustration for Alternative 2 is more reflective of the promise of things to come; and he believes with this alternative, the door will be left open to encourage buy-out alternatives like transfer of development rights and other tools. Commissioner Youngman noted if the motion to rescind passes, the Planning staff, residents, and the neighborhood will have to start over. The plan will need to be rewritten, with no action steps being taken. She said she supports the suggestion of a task force. Commissioner Youngman suggested the Commission can be specific in their direction to staff, including time frames, which will address the concerns of the Commissioners and the property owners, without throwing this back into the entire planning process. This plan can be revised; the Commission can provide direction on any implementation strategies. Commissioner Youngman stated it is so much more constructive to go forward with a group that can define the outcomes and define the steps to go forward. She noted people will not give money unless they know there is a chance to conserve some of this land. This is the last sizable undeveloped chuck of Bozeman Creek left within city/county limits. This corridor is important for water quality and flooding prevention. Commissioner Hietala noted there are several alternatives to this plan; one of which was preferred by Planning staff at one time, and another that was recommended by the Planning Board and adopted by the Commission and is now being reconsidered. It seems to him Alternative 2, with some conditions, is the desired outcome. Mayor Cetraro said he would like to see the Planning Board come forward with another approach. Commissioner Kirchhoff asked if there is a roadblock to property owners' desire to develop as presented by this planning document. Could a landowner come to the City and submit his development plan and develop his property with this plan as adopted? Associate Planner Sanford replied they could, and one landowner has submitted his proposal. The problems with his proposal are infrastructure issues; this is a poor piece of property to develop. Commissioner Kirchhoff reiterated this plan does not preclude a landowner from developing his property; there is no legal obstacle to development. If this plan is to work, there needs to be money generated. Commissioner Kirchhoff noted Mr. Albin has suggested a time limitoffour months and perhaps this plan needs a time limit. Commissioner Krauss stated the requirement that new development be reviewed as a Planned Unit Development continues to trouble him, and it is those types of ambiguities that bother him. Commissioner Krauss said that overall he agrees with comments regarding this corridor, but he has problems with the illustrations and what is buried in the document. He believes the Planning Board has an individual who is willing to carry Commissioner Youngman's suggestions for a task force forward, but he questions how the Commission can make changes to this plan without rescinding it and then going forward. Commissioner Youngman suggested a work study session with the Planning Board to define the terms used and why the Planned Unit Development process is required, or the Planning Board can be asked to provide a proposal as to how they plan to implement these strategies. All Commissioner concerns could be listed for the Planning Board, noting the Commission needs more information on these items before they can provide input. Commissioner Youngman said implementation could be adopted by formal policy without rescinding the entire plan. Planning Director Epple noted there is a simpler way than forming a task force, suggesting the Commission could direct staff and the Planning Board, or just staff, to revamp the plan to more closely 01-12-04 ----- ------- .....-....-.-- u........ _ ._._ n_......_._ .._._ ..____ - ----------- .-.- .-..--..---.------------ - 16 - reflect Alternative 2, which acknowledges high ground development potential. If the Commission doesn't like the Planned Unit Development process, which was a recommendation from the Planning Board, it could be stripped from the plan. Although the requirement for the Planned Unit Development process does have some history; it was required for the North 19 Avenue/Oak Street corridor. Alternative 2 is a development- driven conservation plan, which has some merit because it won't cost the city and others money. Commissioner Kirchhoff suggested the plan should be modified with attention to the details that have led to the motion to rescind. Planning Director Epple's suggestion that Planning staff could bring forward a revised document addressing Commission concerns could be acted upon; and then that plan could be adopted, while recognizing the effort of all parties; and it will be a document the Commission will be more comfortable with. Commissioner Krauss responded he likes the task force idea because it puts fire into the idea of time limits and certain necessity to go forward and get some of these things done. He said he is not comfortable just qualifying the plan without also taking the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association's single statement and turning it back around. Commissioner Krauss said these are the things he is looking for in a new plan, in addition to Commissioner Kirchhoff's previous comments. Commissioner Krauss continued by saying it has been said the current plan is so ambiguous it only represents a flag to rally under, rather than a plan to gUide development, at this point. If that is the case, it shouldn't matter if this plan is in place or not. He said this plan needs more work, and he needs to see substantial progress made on implementation strategies by the people speaking on behalf of this plan. Mayor Cetraro noted Alternative 2 has a lot less emphasis on implementation strategies than the Preferred Alternative. Commissioner Krauss said he would be amenable to a substitute motion. Break 9:00 Dm - 9:05 Dm Mayor Cetraro declared a break from 9:00 pm to 9:05 pm, in accordance with Commission policy. Reconsideration of Commission Resolution No. 3647 - adoDtina bv reference the Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master Dlan Commissioner Krauss then withdrew his motion to rescind Commission Resolution No. 3647, adopting by Reference the Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the Commission direct Planning staff, in cooperation with the City Planning Board and Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association as necessary, to report back to the City Commission within two months (1 )with amendments to the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan that include, but are not limited to, Commissioner Krauss' and Commissioner Hietala's concerns regarding the need for an accurate map that depicts existing uses such as homes and a specific policy that would implement strategy number 14, regarding Planned Unit Development review; and (2) with an action plan that identifies tasks, leadership for each task, timeframes, deadlines, and costs. Responding to Commissioner Kirchhoff, Commissioner Krauss stated the outcome may much more closely resemble Alternative 2 when the parties realize what their resources are, but this is the banner the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association is being asked to carry. Commissioner Krauss indicated he needs to know the who, what, when, and how much of the implementation strategies. 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. 01-12-04 _______________________________________n_______________________________ -.-.---...--.---..-.-- .... ....-- ..--......-......-....----- - 17 - Public hearing - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow addition of 480~square-foot apartment above existing rear garage, a side pergola and patio on Lots 25 and 26, Block 5, Beall's 3rd Addition, with deviation from Section 18.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to allow accessory dwelling unit on a lot less than the required 60-foot lot width - Robert Dougherty for Lyn Dawson, 410 North Grand Avenue (Z-03294) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Robert Dougherty for Lyn Dawson under Application No. Z-03294, to allow the addition of a 480-square-foot apartment above the existing rear garage, a side pergola and a patio on Lots 25 and 26, Block 5, Beall's 3rd Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to allow the addition of an accessory dwelling unit on a lot less than the required 60-foot lot width. The subject property is located at 410 North Grand Avenue. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Distributed just prior to the meeting was a letter from Christy Stillwell and Tim Tripp. 414 North Grand Avenue, expressing concerns about the project. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor presented the staff report. She reviewed the application, noting staff has reviewed this application in light of the applicable criteria and recommends conditional approval. Staff's comprehensive findings are found in the staff report. Robert Dougherty, applicant, stated there is an existing garage, and this proposal calls for a slight addition to the north to allow for a stairway to the upstairs. There has been neighborhood concern with the apartment's impact on the available parking because of the parking restriction on the east side of North Grand Avenue. Three off-street parking spaces, four with the garage, are provided in the proposed site plan. Mr. Dougherty noted the neighbor to the south has built an accessory dwelling, as has the neighbor to the north; and this project hopes to fit in with the current state of neighborhood development. Mr. Dougherty closed by saying all materials will match the exiting house. Commissioner Krauss asked if the existing garage will be torn down and replaced with this new structure. Mr. Dougherty replied the current garage requires a new foundation, but there is a chance they can take the walls down and install a new foundation, then put the walls back up. Sometimes new construction is less expensive than refurbishing the old. However, they feel it is important to get City approval before they make any decision on those types of things. Tim Tripp, 414 North Grand Avenue, said they built a garage with a studio last year, but both theirs and the one to the south are not accessory dwellings, they are studios. Mr. Tripp said they are concerned with adding a second rental unit on this property, and they are concerned with the future of the entire neighborhood. If everyone did this, the neighborhood would run into parking issues, and it would definitely change the fabric of the neighborhood block. Mr. Dougherty responded this property is zoned R3, so accessory dwellings are always under scrutiny; but the City has recognized that infill development will offset the sprawl that this city is experiencing. There has been a movement toward allowing accessory dwellings; and if this lot was more than 60 feet wide, this proposal wouldn't be coming before the Commission. They understand the neighbors' concerns, but this is only a one-bedroom apartment. Lyn Dawson, owner, said the neighbors can rent their studios that currently exist to both the north and south with very little modification. She, too, could have concerns that those properties could be rented in the future. She assured the Commission and the neighbors that she will be a live-in landlord. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Kirchhoff, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Robert Dougherty for Lyn Dawson under Application No. Z-03294, to allow the addition of a 480-square-foot apartment above the existing rear garage, a side pergola and a patio on Lots 25 and 26, Block 5, Beall's 3rd Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to allow the addition of an accessory dwelling unit on a lot less than the required 60-foot lot width, be approved subject to the following conditions: 01-12-04 - 18 - 1. The accessory dwelling unit will adhere to the conditions stated in Section 18.38.050 "Accessory Buildings, Uses and Equipment," namely that the unit does not exceed the height or footprint of the principal residence. 2. Three on-site parking spaces shall be provided in the rear of the accessory dwelling unit and will adhere to the conditions stated in Section 18.46.020 "Stall, Aisle and Driveway Design," namely that each space will be a dimension of 20-foot length and 9-foot width. 3. The materials and color scheme of the accessory dwelling unit will match the principal residence. 4. The modification of an existing rear fence will adhere to the conditions stated in Section 18.42.130 "Fences, Walls and Hedges." 5. Prior to building permit approval, the applicants shall apply for water and sewer permits, subject to approval by the Water and Sewer Department. 6. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required fees prior to construction, and within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void. 7. 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 18.64.110 of the Bozeman Unified Development Ordinance. 8. If partial or entire demolition of the existing rear garage needs to occur for the new construction of the accessory dwelling unit, the applicant will supply the Department of Planning with an additional explanation of the subsequent development or treatment of the site after the demolition occurs. 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 hearing - preliminary plat for minor subdivision ~ subdivide 12.06 acres described as COS No. 345 into four commercial lots - Gaston Enaineerina for RMRG Portfolio. LLC: Corona McKinlev. LLC: and Red Mountain Plaza. LLC (Hastinas Shoppina Center. northwest corner of West Main Street and North 15th Avenue) (P-03046) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the preliminary plat for a minor subdivision requested by Gaston Engineering for RMRG Portfolio, LLC; Corona McKinley, LLC; and Red Mountain Plaza, LLC, under Application No. P-03046, to subdivide 12.06 acres described as Certificate of Survey No. 345 into four commercial lots. The subject site is more commonly known as the Hastings Shopping Center, located at the northwest corner of the intersection West Main Street and North 15th Avenue. Mayor Cetraro opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Morris presented the staff report, reviewing the application and the conditions of approval. She noted 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. Dennis Foreman, Gaston Engineering and Surveying, stated they are comfortable with the conditions of approval. 01-12-04 __._....__u_._ . -- -.---.-- - 19 - Director of Public Service Arkell noted this subdivision is located in the Bozeman Solvent Site Groundwater Protection Area and a condition should be added to the plat that the developers must contact the Department of Environmental Quality and receive their approval before disturbing the ground, Eric Nelson, Red Mountain Retail Group, said they are in favor of a condition requiring Department of Environmental Quality contact and approval. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing, It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Krauss, that the preliminary plat for a minor subdivision requested by Gaston Engineering for RMRG Portfolio, LLC; Corona McKinley, LLC; and Red Mountain Plaza, LLC, under Application No. P-03046, to subdivide 12.06 acres described as Certificate of Survey No, 345 into four commercial lots, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1, A reciprocal access and parking easement shall be provided for all shared accesses and parking facilities, The easement shall state that the drive accesses and parking areas are permitted reciprocal use by all of the lots of the subdivision. 2. Per Section 16.14.060, B "Utility Easements", the rear and side yard utility easements shall be 20 feet wide, centered on the lot lines and the front yard utility easements shall be 12 feet wide, In the event front yard easements are used, rear yard easements must still be provided unless written confirmation is submitted to the Planning Department from ALL utility companies indicating that "front yard easements only"are adequate, The utility easement may be combined with the sewer or water line easement if the plat identifies the easement as a "Sewer/Water/Utility Easement". 3. The applicant shall determine if there is an existing irrigation easement for the ditch running along the north and west property line. If no easement is currently on file then the subdivider shall establish a minimum 20-foot wide irrigation easement with 15 feet on one side and 5 feet on the other side of the facility to allow for construction, repair, maintenance and inspection as outlined in Section 16, 14,060.C "Irrigation Facility Easements", 4, Section 16.14.090 "Mail Delivery"states that if mail delivery will not be to each individual lot within the subdivision, the subdivider shall provide an off-street area for mail delivery within the subdivision in cooperation with the United States Postal Service, 5. The final plat shall conform to all requirements of the Bozeman Subdivision Regulations and the Uniform Standards for Final Subdivision Plats and shall be accompanied by all required documents, a platting certificate and a separate exhibit describing all of the subdivision easements. The final plat application shall include four (4) signed reproducible copies on a stable base polyester film (or equivalent); two (2) digital copies on a double-sided, high density 3Y:1:-inch floppy disk or compact disk; and five (5) paper prints. 6. Conditional approval of the preliminary plat shall be in force for not more than three calendar years, as provided by state statute. Prior to that expiration date, the developer may submit a letter of request for the extension of the period to the Planning Director for the City Commission's consideration. 7. 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% of the cost of the remaining improvements. 01-12-04 ----..----- - 20- 8. All domestic and fire service lines shall have the appropriate backflow protection and any necessary plumbing upgrades to facilitate the backflow protection that is required by the City of Bozeman Water and Sewer Department and the Uniform Plumbing Code. This cost will be borne by the owners. 9. The water service supplying water through the Hide-A-Way bar to a majority of the businesses on the west side of the shopping center shall be restricted to only one meter. The Water and Sewer Department will abandon the additional water meters that are currently serving each business. This is in keeping with the present departmental policy of one water line and one water meter. 10. Storm water 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 storm water 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. A stormwater pond shall be constructed on common open space unless calculations are submitted and approved which show that the existing storm sewer main in North 15th Avenue is adequately sized to convey the runoff without first being detained. 11. 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. 12. 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. No building permits shall be issued prior to substantial completion and City acceptance of the required infrastructure improvements. 13. 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. 14. The location of existing water and sewer mains shall be properly depicted. Proposed main extensions shall be noted as proposed. 01-12-04 ---------- - -- ..-----.- ...------....".--..--- ----.---.-- - 21 - 15. The drive approach shall be constructed in accordance with the City's standard approach (i.e., concrete apron, sidewalk section and drop curb) and shown as such on the final site plan. A City Curb Cut and Sidewalk Permit shall be obtained prior to final site plan approval. 16. Ditch relocation: a. The Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks shall be contacted by the applicant regarding the proposed relocation and any required permits (i.e., 310, 404, turbidity exemption, etc.) shall be obtained prior to final site plan approval. b. The applicant shall obtain written permission from the ditch owner for the proposed relocation. 17. 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. 18. Easements shall be granted for the existing water and sewer mains on the north and west side of the existing building. On the west side, the easement shall encompass the area from 10 feet east of the water main to the property line. 19. Project phasing shall be clearly defined including installation of infrastructure. 20. 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. 21. The proposed street cut on Main Street for the installation of services to lot 4 shall be completed prior to the Main Street overlay project which is projected to occur in 2006. If the services are not installed prior to the overlay being complete, a main extension off of North 15th Avenue or the main west of the building will be required to provide service to this lot. 22. Any cracked or broken portions of sidewalk along any of the street frontages shall be replaced. 23. The developers shall contact the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) before anyon-site ground disturbance. A copy of DEQ's response must be forwarded to the City Engineering Department for consideration prior to any earth movement (i.e., installation of infrastructure, utilities or any other on-site improvements). 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. Continued Dublic hearina - variance from subdivision reaulations for The Villaae Downtown - C&H Enaineerina for The Villaae Investment GrouD - allow new street aligned with East Mendenhall Street to have a different name (P-03021 B) This was the time and place set for the continued public hearing on the variance from Section 16.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, as requested by C&H Engineering for The Village Investment Group under Application No. P-03021 B, to allow the new street aligned with East Mendenhall Street to have a different name. Mayor Cetraro reopened the continued public hearing. Contract Planner Lanette Windemaker presented the staff report. She reviewed the application, noting the Development Review Committee does not believe the renaming 0 f this extension 0 fEast Mendenhall Street is in the public interest and it does not meet all of the established review criteria; and 01-12-04 - 22- therefore, there is no recommendation of approval. The Planning Board also does not forward a recommendation of approval because this subdivision variance application does not meet all of the review criteria. Staff recommends that the new street in direct alignment with East Mendenhall Street be named East Mendenhall Street. Karin Caroline, Delaney & Company and the Village Investment Group, noted they are requesting this variance to allow the naming of a new street, to be aligned with East Mendenhall Street, the Village Boulevard. She reviewed the maps and historical references that were included in the Commission's packets. They believe this variance meets the hardship criteria because of the sensitive wetlands and the large embankment forcing the east/west streets to go no further. East Mendenhall Street does not line up exactly with the proposed street, and this new street will be a different road type. This street will only serve the residents of The Village Downtown and shouldn't be viewed as an extension of East Mendenhall Street. Ms. Caroline said they believe the termination of East Mendenhall Street at Broadway Avenue makes more sense and will be less confusing. Lowell Springer, Springer Group Architects, stated he believes changing the name is a good idea and a great opportunity to have the City look at roundabouts for these streets. Bill Muhlenfeld, applicant, noted the name as originally proposed was Off Broadway Boulevard, but that was found to be not acceptable. The Village Boulevard name has been included on every document, and it was only perceived as a problem at the last minute. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Cetraro closed the public hearing. Commissioner Krauss said he finds the street name Village Boulevard inside the development intuitive, and the natural features provide a physical condition of undue hardship. There will be no substantial cost to the public since this street will be developed with the applicants' money. Mayor Cetraro stated his concurrence with the four findings in support of this variance. Commissioner Youngman said the fact that the wetlands and topography prevents the road from going east doesn't create a hardship at the point where the intersection lies. She feels this variance doesn't meet the criteria, and it is not wise public policy to change street names. Also, staff feels approval of this variance is unwise, and she won't go against the recommendations of City staff. Commissioner Kirchhoff concurred with Commissioner Youngman's statement regarding this variance not meeting the required criteria. He, too, is not inclined to go against the recommendation of City staff, particularly when the Director of Public Safety feels it will be confusing for public safety personnel to allow a different street name. Commissioner Hietala said he believes there is a very definite separation between the development and East Mendenhall Street, and he agrees with Commissioner Krauss' statements. It was moved by Commissioner Krauss, seconded by Commissioner Kirchhoff, that the variance from Section 16.16.040 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, as requested by C&H Engineering for The Village Investment Group under Application No. P-03021 B, to allow the new street aligned with East Mendenhall Street to have a different name, be approved. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Krauss, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Cetraro; those voting No being Commissioner Kirchhoff and Commissioner Youngman. Discussion - FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1 ) Letter from Bert Hopeman, dated December 16, forwarding his resignations from the Downtown Bozeman Improvement District Board (lOB) and the Downtown Business Improvement District Board (BID). (2) Notice of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association meeting scheduled for 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, January 27, in the Commission Room. 01-12-04 ._...___ __.__.. _. __.. __.._.._.... n_ ...._________.__._.___..._ ________n_..__. ----------.-.-- - 23- (3) Newsletterfrom Headwaters Recycling announcing the board meeting scheduled for January 8 in Boulder. (4) Agenda for the School District NO.7 Board of Directors meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, January 12, at the Willson School. (5) Agenda for the Gallatin County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 13, at the Courthouse. (6) Agenda for the County Planning Board meeting to be held at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 13, at the Courthouse, along with minutes of the meeting held on December 9, 2003. (7) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, January 13, at the Professional Building. (8) Agenda for the Design Review Board meeting to be held at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 13, at the Professional Building. (9) Agenda for the Bozeman Area Transportation Coordinating Committee meeting to be held at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, January 21, in the Commission Room. During his FYI, Mayor Cetraro wished departing City Manager Johnson all the best in his future endeavors. Director of Public Service Arkell distributed a pamphlet entitled "55 Facts, Figures, and Follies of Water Conservation", which will be mailed to all households with the next water billing. This is the City's first attempt at public water conservation. During her FYI, Commissioner Youngman suggested Commissioner Hietala might want to be the Commission liaison to the Library Board of Trustees. During his FYI, Commissioner Krauss offered the following: 1) Thanked everyone for their patience with his first meeting; 2) Suggested the Public Comment portion of the meeting be moved to the first item of the 7:00 pm session; 3) Requested packets be delivered rather than having the Commissioners pick them up; 4) Stated he would like staff to work hard to resolve Delaney and Company's request for reduction in the number of required parking spaces for their 777 East Main Street building. During his FYI Commissioner Hietala asked for the definition of inverse condemnation. City Attorney Luwe responded that condemnation was the taking of property for public use through eminent domain while inverse condemnation is where a property owner brings an action because of some government action or regulation that has resulted in the taking of his property. Public Comment. Continued Lowell Springer, Springer Group Architects, stated the Bozeman Creek corridor is an important part of what Bozeman will do for itself in the next 50 years. He suggested that when talking about the Bozeman Creek Corridor sub-area master plan, it would be better to refer to it as the Bozeman Creek Corridor vision and discriminate it from the word "plan" because many landowners think this plan will have absolute authority to be executed and will be used against them. In this way, people could be brought together to support the vision. Adjournment M 9:55 Dm 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. 01-12-04 .. _. _.___.__.u_". .._.__ __.n___n . ..._ --.----. - 24- A ATTEST: ~.si~ Clerk of the Commission PREPARED BY: ~A~~ Deputy Clerk of the Commission 01-12-04 --- ..-----. --.---- _n .._._ _..___..