Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-12-08 Minutes, City Commission MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA December 8, 2003 ***************************** The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Community Room at the Gallatin County Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, on Monday, December 8,2003, at 4:00 p.m. Present were Mayor Steve Kirchhoff, Commissioner Marcia Youngman, Commissioner Lee Hietala, Commissioner Jarvis Brown, Commissioner Andrew Cetraro, City Manager Clark Johnson, Director of Public Service Debbie Arkell (for the afternoon session), Planning Director Andy Epple, Staff Attorney Tim Cooper and Clerk of the Commission Robin Sullivan (for the afternoon session) and Deputy Clerk of the Commission Karen DeLathower (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. Minutes - January 18. 2000. and June 10. November 24 and December 1. 2003 It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the minutes of the meetings of January 18, 2000, and June 10, November 24 and December 1, 2003, be approved as submitted. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Consent Items City Manager Johnson presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Ordinance No. 1605 - Zone Map Amendment - establish initial municipal zonina desianation of "R-2." Residential-Sinale-household-Medium-densitv. on 78.3089 acres in the N% and SE% of Section 24. T2S. R5E. MPM (west side of South Third Avenue. south of Allison Subdivision. Phase II. and north of Sacaiawea Middle School) (Z-02008): finallv adopt ORDINANCE NO. 1605 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, AMENDING THE CITY OF BOZEMAN ZONE MAP BY ESTABLISHING AN INITIAL ZONING DESIGNATION OF "R-2" (RESIDENTIAL-SINGLE-HOUSEHOLD, MEDIUM- DENSITY DISTRICT) ON 78.3089 ACRES SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 2 SOUTH, RANGE 5 EAST, MONTANA PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, lYING ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTH THIRD AVENUE, SOUTH OF ALLISON SUBDIVISION, PHASE II, AND NORTH OF SACAJAWEA MIDDLE SCHOOL. Approval of final plat for 8ridaer Apartments II - subdivide 5.099 acres described as Tract 68. COS No. 822. into two residential/office commercial lots (north side of West Colleae Street at Professional Drive extended) (P-03043) Authorize City Manaaer to sian - Aaricultural Lease with Josh Jones for propertv described as Tract 1-A. Tract 3-A and Tract 4-A. COS No. 2153. Tract A. COS No. 939. and Tracts 1 and 3. COS No. 1723 (the Mandeville Farm Site) 12-08-03 - 2 - Acknowledae receipt of application for vacation of West Lincoln Street between South 5th Avenue and the north/south allev in Block 51. Capitol Hill addition: refer to staff Applications for renewal of Beer. Wine and Liauor License for Calendar Year 2004 Buildina Inspection Division report for November 2003 Claims It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Brown, 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 Hietala, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Ordinance No. 1607 - settina City Commissioners' salaries Included in the Commissioners' packets was a copy of Ordinance No. 1607, entitled: ORDINANCE NO. 1607 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, FIXING THE SALARIES OF THE CITY COMMISSIONERS AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONT ANA, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 2.04.070 OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE. Mayor Kirchhoff suggested an increase for the Commissioners similar to last year's, with no adjustment in the monthly allowance to cover incidental costs. He characterized this as an incremental increase, expressing his desire to some day professionalize the Commissioner position. He then stated that under this ordinance, the salary of a Commissioner would increase to $700 and the Mayor would increase to $1,050 per month. Mr. Buz Tarlow, attorney and taxpayer of the City, spoke in support of the proposed increase. He noted that the City Commission has dealt with a number of complex issues over the years, and it seems that development issues are becoming even more complex. Additionally, he noted it is an important principle in the country and the state that elected officials should be paid. He stated that to increase the salary makes serving on the Commission available to those from all kinds of income backgrounds. He concluded by encouraging the Commissioners to adopt the ordinance as submitted. Mr. Sam Harvey, 606 South 13th Avenue, stated his opposition to any increase. He also encouraged the Commissioners to tend to the business of the Commission and not stray beyond it. Commissioner Youngman noted that a downtown business person, upon reviewing the proposed increase, commented that based on the number of hours Commissioners worked when surveyed a decade ago, they will now be paid minimum wage. Given the fact that the Commission manages a $50 million annual budget and given the complex community issues addressed on a regular basis, she feels $8,400 is a reasonable annual salary. Commissioner Cetraro stated he looks forward to focusing on issues and on streamlining processes; and he does not support an increase at this time. It was moved by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Cetraro, that Ordinance No. 1607, setting the Commissioners' salaries, be provisionally adopted and that it be brought back in four weeks for final adoption. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Youngman and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No being Commissioner Cetraro and Commissioner Hietala. 12-08-03 - 3 - Discussion re downtown traffic plan for Main Street Information distributed to the Commissioners included a memo from Planning Director Andy Epple, dated November 19, forwarding a listing of the thirteen improvements identified in the Downtown Bozeman Traffic Improvement Study; a memo from the Downtown Bozeman Partnership, dated December 2, forwarding the results of a survey of its members; a copy of the petition forwarded to Mr. Dave Galt, Director of the Montana Department of Transportation, stating opposition to the three-lane format; a copy of the minutes from the September 24 meeting of the Transportation Coordinating Committee; a letter from Bill and Patty Fraser, dated December 5, stating opposition to the three-lane proposal; a letter from Jody Sanford, dated December 8, urging approval of the three-lane alternative; a letter from Jay Sinnott, dated December 4, stating support for the three-lane format; and a letter from Jenny McCure, dated November 14, supporting the three-lane format. Planning Director Andy Epple briefly reviewed his memo and the recommendation forwarded by the Transportation Coordinating Committee (TCC). Her eported that the T CC held its pUblic hearing 0 n September 24 and forwarded its recommendation at the October 15 meeting. He noted that the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2001 Update analyzed the configuration of traffic patterns in the downtown and concluded that a more in-depth analysis was needed. Subsequently, the Bozeman Downtown Partnership contracted with SEH to conduct that analysis; and the result was a document that includes a list of thirteen specific recommendations for traffic patterns and the streetscape in the downtown area. He stressed that the three-lane format is one of those thirteen recommendations upon which the Commission is being asked to act. He indicated that attached to his memo is a listing of the thirteen items and the recommendations from both the Downtown Bozeman Partnership and the Transportation Coordinating Committee. He concluded by noting the Commission's decision will have impacts on the design for the Main Street reconstruction project that the Montana Department of Transportation plans to undertake within the next few years. Mr. Rob Bukvich, local office of the Montana Department of Transportation (MDoT), responded to several questions from Mayor Kirchhoff. He stated that monies have been allocated for reconstruction of Main Street; and the project is set for 2006 or 2007. At this time, the project is on hold until the City Commission forwards its recommendation on the configuration of the street. Once that decision is made, the Department will proceed with design of the project. He stressed that the three-lane configuration is not a new concept; in fact, it was included in the MAKERS plan for the downtown that was completed in 1993. He noted that the MOoT felt this was the time to look at the possible new configuration, since the street is to be reconstructed; and changing the configuration is not as simple as just restriping. He stated the existing four-lane facility serves the through traffic well; the proposed three-lane facility would serve turning traffic more efficiently. He cautioned that if the downtown core is to be expanded to include the side streets, the number of turning movements will be increased and would be best served by a three-lane facility. Mr. Bukvich stated the existing four-lane facility has a 30-percent reserve capacity, while a three- lane facility would have a 10-percent reserve capacity. He noted that the growth rate in traffic volume on Main Street has been essentially flat for the past twenty years, at approximately 12,000 vehicles per day. Responding to Commissioner Cetraro, Mr. Bukvich stated there is a lot of lane change activity in the current four-lane format, as drivers avoid those parallel parking or those turning left; and this results in a significant amount of conflict. He noted that accident rate could probably be reduced by 25 percent if those lane change maneuvers were eliminated. He also indicated that a left turn arrow could be incorporated into the signal upgrade with the three-lane format, but cannot be with two through lanes each direction. Responding to questions from Commissioners, Mr. Bukvich indicated that curb bulbs at signalized intersections don't dramatically improve pedestrian safety or alleviate conflicts. He then acknowledged there are some down sides to curb bulbs, including cost, drainage and snow plowing issues. He stressed that curb bulbs must be individually designed for the intersection. He noted that, while curb bulbs may work in the three-lane format, they will not work in the existing four-lane format because the traffic lane would be too close to allow for turning maneuvers. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, Mr. Bukvich confirmed that changing to a three-lane or four-lane format in the future is not as simple as restriping; and the State's money will not be available at that time. He noted the last time Main Street was reconstructed was 1972. 12-08-03 - .....----.-......- --...----.- -4- Mr. Harry Hughes, Manager of the local SEH Engineering office, noted that the report indicates the typical section of Main Street is 64 feet wide; in reality, it is 62 feet wide. As a result of that change, the design has been amended to reflect a 12-foot center turn lane instead of a 14-foot center lane; and this change does not alter any of the conclusions or recommendations in the report. He then stressed that this study was an engineering assessment of vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian movements, not an economic assessment of business issue. Steve "the Main Man" spoke in opposition to the new plan, stating he is concerned that the three- lane format would hurt downtown businesses. He noted that those businesses have incurred the costs of the downtown streetscape project, which has dramatically enhanced the appearance of Main Street, and he is concerned that changing the street would result in fewer people coming downtown to support those businesses. Mr. Michael Dean, 908 South Tracy Avenue, stated he is currently an MSU student. He has found that he can travel to class by bicycle as fast as he can by car and, in fact, rides his bicycle as much as possible. He spoke in support of the three-lane plan, noting that he has been sideswiped on Main Street by a fifth wheel trailer even though, under State law, he is a vehicle and has the same rights as other vehicles. He then stated that, as a bicyclist, he supports downtown businesses and consistently shops there fi rst. Mr. Bob Fletcher stated he owns three buildings along Main Street and has attended seven meetings on this issue. He noted that when the report came out with the 64-foot street width, he personally measured the street and found that it consistently measured 60 or 61 feet. This discrepancy makes him question the entire engineering report. He then noted there is no way to park a car, which is typically 6 feet wide and 16 feet long, in a 5-foot-wide bicycle lane without swinging into the driving lane and stopping all traffic. He also cautioned that delivery trucks cannot maneuver around curb bulbs. He then expressed concern that the one-lane configuration will be the death of downtown Bozeman, which is presently beautiful and vibrant. He indicated there are parts of the plan that he likes, including the count down lights for pedestrians and brick crosswalks. Ms. Ana Maria Torres, owner of a downtown building and business, spoke in opposition to the proposed three-lane configuration. She noted the Montana Department of Transportation's interest and expertise is in traffic, not business economics. She stated that Cedar Street in Helena, to which Main Street has been compared, is not a state highway nor is it in the downtown. She expressed her interest in seeing the downtown businesses remain viable, not struggling to overcome the problems incurred as a result of street changes, and encouraged the Commission to consider the concerns of the 900 people who signed the petition of opposition to the three-lane format. Mr. Sam Harvey read a letter of opposition to the three-lane format into the record from Harry Huntsinger, owner of The Store. He noted that those unloading trucks will have their backs to the traffic, causing concern for their safety. In addition, the new format would cause problems for snow plowing, creating severe traffic hazards. He also read a letter of opposition into the record from Authority Builders. And, on a personal note, Mr. Harvey stated that he, too, is opposed to the proposed change. He concluded by encouraging the Commission to not continue to make Bozeman the "All America Divided City". Mr. Ray Erickson stated he has owned a business on Main Street for over thirty years. He noted that a majority of the business owners and a majority of his customers are opposed to the three-lane plan. Further, he noted recent traffic studies have shown no increase in traffic for twenty years and questioned why the street configuration should be changed. He concluded by encouraging the Commission to forward a "no" recommendation to the Montana Department of Transportation. Mr. Doug Fisher stated he operates a produce company that delivers six days a week, using trucks that range from 14 to 30 feet in length. He expressed concern about the proposed curb bulbs, noting that they would make it extremely difficult for those trucks to maneuver around the downtown area. Further, he noted it has been proposed that the center lane be used for deliveries; however, few downtown businesses want to receive deliveries through the front door. As a result, delivery trucks have found a way to use the alley system that works for everyone. He concluded by encouraging the Commission to not approve the proposed three-lane format. 12-08-03 - 5 - Ms. Jana Tootsie noted that, as a shopper, she is opposed to the proposed three-lane format. She believes that not having trucks on Main Street would help; to reverse the one-way couplet would help; and she does not believe bicycles should be allowed on Main Street. Ms. Rikki Bushnell, Bozeman TV and Appliance, stated she works and shops downtown. She expressed concurrence with many of the comments from the previous speaker, noting that reversing the one-way streets would alleviate many of the perceived problems. She then stated she finds the bike lane a problem, particularly given the high turnover of cars in the on-street parking spaces and the potential for conflicts between car doors and bicycles. She noted that drivers are impatient and, if a three-lane format is chosen, they will swing into the center lane to go around those attempting to parallel park. She concluded by encouraging the Commission to not consider the three-lane format. Mr. Ralph Ferraro stated he has owned the Rocking R Bar in beautiful downtown Bozeman for many years. He is adamantly opposed to the proposed change, and encourages the Commissioners to retain Main Street as a beautiful and functional street in Montana. Mr. Chris Pope, Rocky Mountain Toy Company, expressed his strong advocacy for the three-lane format. He acknowledged that some important and valid issues have been raised about deliveries and pedestrian crossings; however, he stated it is also important to reduce pedestrian accidents and conflicts. He further noted that the community has been told that the Montana Department of Transportation is no longer constructing four-lane facilities in downtown areas. He then suggested that, as people realize the East Main Street exit is the one access to the community without a significant number of traffic signals, the volume on Main Street will increase. He stated that he, too, would be impacted if the economic vitality of the downtown is not sustained; and he feels that ensuring the safety of pedestrians is a key to that vitality. Mr. Mike Hope, downtown business person, encouraged the Commissioners to look at North 19th Avenue, which is a three-lane facility. He characterized it as a disaster at 5:00 p.m. He recognized that a four-lane configuration may not be used today; however, he feels that retaining the existing configuration will result in continued downtown vitality, and a majority of those downtown prefer it. Ms. Ashley Ogle, Kenyon-Noble, stated opposition to the three-lane configuration and bulb outs and support for the pedestrian countdown lights and enhancements to the crosswalks. Mr. Bobby Cove stated he has operated a business downtown for fourteen years. He noted that a conversation with a police officer a couple months ago revealed that he thought the three-lane format was a bad idea, particularly since there are not many accidents in the downtown area. He also cautioned that the bulb outs simply put pedestrians closer to danger. Mr. Christopher Scott stated he feels the three-lane format would be good for the downtown. He noted the current four-lane format is a thoroughfare while a three-lane format would make the downtown a destination and give people an opportunity to look at the stores while driving. Mr. Tom Stonecipher noted that he lived in Chicago before moving to Bozeman, and was there when traffic was limited on State Street. He stated the result was "businesses closing like flies"; and the street has since been reopened. He expressed concern that no one has been able to say for sure the three-lane format won't have an adverse effect on downtown Bozeman, which is vibrant and sets this community apart from others. He concluded by stating that if it is not known that the three-lane format will improve the downtown and allow the community to retain its uniqueness, the Commission should not vote for it. Mr. Bob Lashaway, Facilities Director at Montana State University, stated he is the MSU representative on the TCC and was a dissenting vote on the recommendation forwarded to the Commission. He noted that the Montana Department of Transportation's concern is how Main Street functions as a highway, with the ability to move traffic through safely and expeditiously being of primary importance. He stated the TCC vote reflects that either the three-lane or four-lane format can work from an engineering standpoint. He stated, however, he voted against the three-lane format for four reasons. First, many deliveries in Bozeman are made from over-the-road trucks and the alley system is not straight through and reliable. Second, the transition between three and four lanes will require significant consideration. He noted that extending the three-lane format to the 1-90 interchange on the east end may be possible; but transition at the west end would require considerable engineering. Third, he remains skeptical about side street movements and the impacts that curb bulbs would have on larger vehicles maneuvering through the downtown area. Also, he recognizes the significant opposition and concern from the business community 12-08-03 - 6 - and does not wish to impact that vitality. And, fourth, he stated that going with a four-lane format at this time will not preclude conversion to a three-lane format in the future. He noted that if additional downtown development occurs, possibly including the arts center project, traffic will also increase and the four-lane format can accommodate it. Ms. Bobby Bare, lOB Board, voiced her support for the proposed three-lane format, which she believes would calm traffic and allow the same flow of traffic through town. She noted that she is a downtown shopper, and her concerns revolve around the ability to maneuver around the downtown area and make left turns, particularly if additional development occurs on the north side of the core. Mr. Michael Vincent stated he owns 17-19 South Tracy Avenue, which includes commercial property with residences above. He spoke in support of the three-lane format, noting that it lends itself to more readily turning off Main Street onto the side streets and that will actually benefit the businesses on the side streets. He noted the lack of increased traffic on Main Street suggests that people are avoiding Main Street. He encouraged the Commissioners to be progressive and forward a recommendation for the new format rather than sticking with the status quo. Mr. Gary Vodehnal, 614 South 7th Avenue, stated he works downtown. One of his primary concerns is safety, particularly for those who bicycle on Main Street. He noted that traffic in the downtown is very erratic right now, making it dangerous for bicyclists. Also, it is unsafe for pedestrians attempting to cross the street when cars are attempting to turn onto Main Street; and curb bulbs could help improve the safety. He suggested that making it safer for people to move around the downtown area could help local businesses compete with the big box stores on the fringes of the community. Ms. Sue Smith voiced her strong opposition to the proposed three-lane format for Main Street. She stated that safety is not a new issue, noting she survived being hit at the intersection of North 7th Avenue and West Main Street in the late 1960s. She cautioned that things happen regardless of street configurations, noting people are careless as drivers, pedestrians and bicyclists. She concluded by once again voicing her opposition, stating she believes the three-lane configuration would be terrible for downtown businesses. Ms. Mary Vant Hull, 416 East Story Street, stated she has been riding her bicycle in Bozeman for 41 years. She noted that, while she has never had an accident in downtown Bozeman, she has been involved in an accident further out in the community. She indicated that bicyclists don't need parking spaces and, as a result, downtown merchants should welcome them. She stated that if one rides through the downtown area slowly it is possible to travel safety and, if desired, shop exclusively in the downtown. She concluded by expressing her support for the existing four-lane format and not the proposed three-lane format. Mr. Thomas Nygard stated he has been a downtown businessman for over three decades and owns three buildings along Main Street. He noted there is not a soul present who is not acting with sincere passion for the downtown. He indicated his strong support for the proposal, stating he feels it will enhance the downtown and proposed improvements in the downtown area. Mr. Ivan Oieruf, Powder Horn, stated he owns two storefronts in the downtown area. In sixty years in business, he can't recall anyone saying it was dangerous and, as a result, wouldn't shop in the downtown. On the contrary, he has heard many comments about the beautiful downtown. He then addressed the comment that the MOoT is no longer building four-lane roads in downtowns anymore, questioning when the last downtown area was built. Mr. Larry Aasheim, Universal Athletics, stated he has been in business in the downtown area for over thirty years. He expressed his opposition to the proposed three-lane format and encouraged the Commission to consider the many people who make a living in the downtown area and retain the four-lane format. Mr. Todd Hoitsma, 427 West Story Street, stated he works downtown and is a big supporter of the three-lane format. Mr. Steve Wheeler stated that in his business, he has the opportunity to talk to a lot of people; and a majority of them have expressed opposition to the three-lane option and support for keeping four lanes. He noted that he has been in towns where left turns are limited at certain times, and that seems to work 12-08-03 - 7 - well. He suggested that changing the one-way streets to allow for right turns might also help traffic flow in the downtown. He concluded by urging the Commission to retain the existing street format, cautioning that a major change could cause some undesirable results. Mayor Kirchhoff noted that the recommended improvements in the Downtown Bozeman Traffic Improvement Study include thirteen specific items. He suggested that the Commissioners provide their comments on each, thus generating the information necessary to formulate a motion on which to act. He further proposed that the Commission act on the two key items first, then take the remainder in numeric order. In light of the Mayor's suggestion, the Commissioners proceeded to provide their positions on each of the thirteen items, as follows. 9. Convert Main Street to 3-lane cross-section with bicycle lanes and existing on-street parking. Commissioner Cetraro stated he is opposed to this item, particularly in light of the testimony the Commission has just received. Mayor Kirchhoff expressed his concurrence. Commissioner Youngman stated that, based on the strong downtown business opposition and a fair amount of general community opposition, she too, does not support this item. She cautioned, however, that many things have not been factored into the discussion that might have a negative impact on the downtown if the existing format is retained. Those might include no left turns from Main Street, reversing the one-way streets, converting the one-way streets back to two-way streets, and additional development on Mendenhall Street. She suggested that these issues be subject to additional discussion to ensure that unintended negative impacts are avoided. Commissioner Hietala stated that he, too, is opposed to the three-lane format. He noted that it is important to entice people to Main Street and to address anticipated increases in traffic volumes. Commissioner Brown stated he does not support the three-lane format. He noted there is obviously a lot of opposition from the downtown business people, who have a lot at stake. He acknowledged that traffic counts reflect little change in the volume in the downtown area between 1980 and 1999, with those counts at approximately 12,000 vehicles per day; however, recent counts on East Main Street are now showing 19,000 vehicles per day. 11. Install curb extensions at intersections in the downtown core. Commissioner Cetraro stated he does not support curb bulbs at this time. Commissioner Youngman noted that curb bulbs were proposed in conjunction with the three-lane format, but she stressed they do not work well with retaining the four-lane format. She stated that other curb bulbs in the community, particularly those along South Willson Avenue, have resulted in changing many bus routes because school buses could not successfully negotiate around them; and she does not want to see similar problems created on Main Street. Commissioner Brown stated he cannot support curb bulbs at this time, but suggested that a study might be appropriate. In light of those comments, Mayor Kirchhoff noted a majority of the Commissioners do not support curb bulbs. 1. Signalize Main StreetlWallace Avenue intersection. All five Commissioners indicated support. 2. Downtown signal system upgrade. All five Commissioners indicated support. 3. Convert Rouse Avenue back to two-way operation between Main Street and Babcock Street. All five Commissioners indicated support. 12-08-03 -8- 4. Signalize Rouse Avenue/Babcock Street intersection (long term). All five Commissioners indicated support. 5. Pedestrian crossing pavement treatments. All five Commissioners indicated support. 6. Identify and obtain additional City-operated surface parking, primarily south of Main Street. All five Commissioners indicated support. 7. Improve downtown alley system. All five Commissioners indicated support. 8. Mid-block pedestrian crossing with curb extensions and pedestrian refuge on Main Street between Rouse Avenue and Bozeman Avenue. Commissioner Hietala expressed his support for a mid-block crossing in the double block on Main Street; the other four Commissioners expressed their opposition to this item. 10. (a) Extend one-way couplet to Wallace Avenue on Mendenhall Street and (b) Make Wallace Avenue one-way northbound between Babcock and Mendenhall. All five Commissioners expressed support for the first portion of this item, to extend the one-way couplet for Mendenhall Street to Wallace Avenue, and expressed opposition to the second portion of the item, to make Wallace Avenue a one-way between Babcock and Mendenhall. 12. Signalize the intersections of Mendenhall/Black and Babcock/Black for signal coordination and improved pedestrian conditions. All five Commissioners indicated support. 13. Countdown pedestrian timers. All five Commissioners indicated support. It was moved by Commissioner Cetraro, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Commission forward a recommendation to the Montana Department of Transportation that Item Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10a, 12 and 13 be approved and that Item Nos. 8, 9, 10b and 11 not be approved for improvements to Main Street in Bozeman's downtown core. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. It was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, that the Commission continue communications with various groups, including the Montana Department of Transportation, Downtown Bozeman Partnership and Transportation Coordinating Committee, to address various issues revolving around downtown traffic flows, including left turn movements on Main Street, increased traffic from additional development on Mendenhall Street, and impacts from changing development patterns in the downtown area. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Recess - 5:55 p.m. Mayor Kirchhoff recessed the meeting at 5:55 p.m., to reconvene at 7:00 p.m. in the Commission Room at City Hall for the purpose of conducting the scheduled public hearings and completing the routine business items. Reconvene - 7:00 p.m. Mayor Kirchhoff reconvened the meeting at 7:00 pm in the Commission Room at City Hall. Public hearina - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow construction of an accessory structure housina a aaraae. workshop. studio. bathroom and personal office on Lots 15-16. Block 101. Northern Pacific Addition. with deviations from Section 18.34.030. to allow construction on lot less than 75 feet wide: from Section 18.50.050.E.. to allow accessory structure to surpass heiaht of 12-08-03 - 9 - principal structure by 4 feet; and from Section 18.04.030. to allow footprint to be 25 percent laraer than main residence - Joseph Maauire. 713 East Cottonwood Street (Z-03269) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Joseph Maguire under Application No. Z-03269, to allow the construction of an accessory structure housing a garage, workshop, studio and personal office Lots 15 and 16, Block 101, Northern Pacific Addition, with deviations from Section 18.34.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow the proposed construction on a lot less than 75 feet wide; from Section 18.50.050.E., to allow the accessory structure to surpass the height of the principal structure by 4 feet; and from Section 18.04.030, to allow the structure's footprint to be 25 percent larger than the main residence. The subject property is located at 713 East Cottonwood Street. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. Assistant Planner MacDonald presented the staff report. She noted the property is currently zoned M-1, but that will change to Historic Mixed Use when the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) takes effect. The applicant is requesting three deviations: to allow construction on a lot less than 75 feet wide, to allow the garage/workshop to exceed the height of the primary structure, and to allow the footprint of the garage/worship to be 25 percent larger than the residence. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the established criteria, and those findings are contained in the staff report. Based on those findings, staff feels this structure is appropriate in this area and recommends conditional approval. Staff has received one phone call and one letter in opposition to this project. The concern expressed by a neighbor is that construction vehicles will drive on her property because there is insufficient room for them to turn around. Assistant Planner MacDonald noted this a standard-width alley. Joseph Maguire, applicant, stated this structure is primarily being constructed as a garage and design studio. No other public comment was received. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Brown, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Joseph Maguire under Application No. Z-03269, to allow the construction of an accessory structure housing a garage, workshop, studio and personal office at 713 East Cottonwood Street, with deviations from Section 18.34.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow the proposed construction on a lot less than 75 feet wide; from Section 18.50.050.E., to allow the accessory structure to surpass the height of the principal structure by 4 feet; and from Section 18.04.030, to allow the structure's footprint to be 25 percent larger than the main residence, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. For all new windows, non-reflective exterior window cladding shall be used; 2. Said windows will have similar design features as windows on the existing house; 3. Siding and roofing shall match materials on the existing house and shed; 4. The garage/workshop structure shall not have a kitchen and shall not be used for housing or a rental unit. If the owner wishes to convert space to housing or a rental, noticing requirements and impact fees will apply and the proposal shall be reviewed under zoning regulations in effect at the time of such application; 5. The garage/workshop structure shall not be used for a home occupation except as defined in Section 18.40.110 "Home Based Business" of the Unified Development Ordinance. If at a later date the owner would like to convert the space to a more intensive business occupation, the proposal shall be reviewed as a site plan under zoning regulations in effect at the time of such application; 12-08-03 ._. . ._._..._.......n_. -.--.-........-. ..-.-... .......-.... - 10 - 6. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to construction and within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void; and 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 18.62.040 of the Bozeman Zoning Ordinance. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Kirchhoff. Those voting No, none. Public hearina - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow construction of new 1.250-sauare-foot two- stOry house on Lots 3 and 4. Block C. Hoffman's Addition. with deviation from Section 18.50.060. to allow front covered porch to extend 7 feet into reauired 20-foot front vard setback (south side of East Dickerson Street. east of South Black Avenue) - Dennis Steinhauer (Z-03280) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Dennis Steinhauer under Application No. 2-03280, to allow the construction of a new 1,250- square-foot two-story house on Lots 3 and 4, Block C, Hoffman's Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.50.060 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to allow the front covered porch to extend 7 feet into the required 20-foot front yard setback. The subject property is located along the south side of East Dickerson Street, east of South Black Avenue. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. Historic Preservation Planner Bristor presented the staff report. She noted the property is currently vacant, and no address has yet been assigned. The property is currently zoned R-3-A and is located within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. This application is to construct a 1,250 square foot, 2- story house, that will cover 18 percent of the total lot area. This project will require one deviation, to allow the front porch to encroach 7 feet into the required front yard setback. Once the UDO takes effect, the front yard setback will be changed to 15 feet for local streets, so this project would require only a 2-foot deviation. Staff has reviewed this application against the established criteria, and those findings are outlined in the staff report. Based on those findings, staff recommends conditional approval. No public comment was received. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Cetraro, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Dennis Steinhauer under Application No. Z-03280, to allow the construction of a new 1 ,250-square-foot two-story house on Lots 3 and 4, Block C, Hoffman's Addition, with a deviation from Section 18.50.060 of the Bozeman Municipal Code to allow the front covered porch to extend 7 feet into the required 20-foot front yard setback be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. A future phased garage and studio in the rear yard shall require an additional Certificate of Appropriateness application. 2. The applicant shall apply for a Sidewalk Permit from the City of Bozeman Engineering Department prior to construction. 3. The applicant shall install boulevard trees along East Dickerson Street at one tree per 50 linear feet of street frontage. The trees shall be installed within the property line. Applicant shall contact the Building Division to obtain the necessary boulevard tree permits. Applicant shall make sure that all locations for boulevard trees are located a minimum of ten feet from any service line (i.e. water, sewer, utility line). 12-08-03 .. -....-..-------.---.-....---..-.----- .-.- .. ----.-......-.. ,,-- - 11 - 4. The applicant shall provide two off-street parking spaces in the area of the rear yard that is designated as the location for the future phased garage and studio. 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 18.62.040 of the Bozeman Zoning Ordinance. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Kirchhoff. Those voting No, none. Public hearing - Certificate of Appropriateness to allow construction of new residence and aaraae with apartment on second floor on Lots 17-18A. Block D. Beall's Second Addition. with deviations from Section 18.18.030. to allow two residential units on a lot that is 4314 feet narrower than 60-foot width: from Section 18.18.050. to allow main residence to encroach 2 feet into reauired 20-foot front yard setback: from Section 18.50.060.C.. to allow main residence to encroach 5 feet and aaraae to encroach 10 feet into reauired 15-foot corner side yard setback: from Section 18.50.11 O.B.. to allow backina distance of less than 26 feet: and from Section 18.50.11 O.F ., to allow one less parkina space than reauired - Robert Douahertv for Nick Zelver and Aida Muraa ( 323 North Black Avenue) (Z-03268) This was the time and place set for the pUblic hearing on the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Roberty Doughtery for Nick Zelver and Aida Murga under Application No. Z-03268, to allow the construction of a new residence and garage with apartment on the second floor on Lots 17 through 18A, Block D, Beall's Second Addition, with deviations from Section 18.18.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow two residential units on a lot that is 4% feet narrower than the required 60-foot width; from Section 18.18.050, to allow the main residence to encroach 2 feet into the required 20-foot front yard setback; from Section 18.50.060.C., to allow the main residence to encroach 5 feet and the garage to encroach 10 feet into the required 15-foot corner side yard setback; from Section 18.50.11 O.B., to allow a backing distance of less than the required 26 feet; and from Section 18.50.110.F., to allow one less parking space than required. The subject property is located at 323 North Black Avenue. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. Assistant Planner Kozub presented the staff report. She noted this property is currently zoned R-3-A and is vacant. Five deviations have been requested: to allow two residential units on a lot with a width 5 feet narrower than the required 60-foot width, to allow the residence to encroach two feet into the required 20-foot front yard setback, to allow the main residence to encroach five feet and the garage to encroach 10 feet into the required 15-foot side yard setback, to allow a backing distance of less than 26 feet, and to allow one parking space less than required. Assistant Planner Kozub called the Commissioners' attention to Condition number 1, regarding the scale and mass of the garage, noting staff recommends the structure be reduced by five feet to lessen the massing and match the side yard setback of the main residence. Staff has reviewed this application in light of the established criteria, and those findings are found in the staff report. Based on those findings, staff recommends conditional approval, including reducing the length of the garage by five feet. Three letters of support have been received. Also, a letter has been received from Ed Adamson, Bozeman Building Traditions, proposing the garage remain the same size but be moved toward the rear of the lot. Staff believes this proposed change will help with the side yard setback, since it will have the same setback as the house. There will also be an improvement in the sight triangle onto Villard Street. 12-08-03 ----.-....-- --. -.----- . . ". - 12 - Mayor Kirchhoff asked if this garage/apartment is larger than what will be allowed under the UDO, to which Planner Kozub replied it is. Ed Adamson, Bozeman Building Traditions, noted the applicants are requesting to move the accessory structure back toward the rear of the property, rather than decreasing its size. The structure is being built to allow the applicants' parents to live in the apartment and to decrease its size will make that unreasonable. Also, they want to conform to the Villard Street aspect of the garage being a subordinate structure. Additionally, this change will improve the sight triangle from the driveway onto Villard Street. Mayor Youngman inquired as to the reduction in square footage if the garage is reduced by five feet. Mr. Adamson replied the reduction will be approximately 180 square feet. Mayor Kirchhoff noted this application was previously approved and asked if these requested changes resulted from a change in family circumstances. Mr. Adamson replied the house was raised in response to financial considerations and the size of the garage was increased, as well. Nick Zelver, applicant, added they have requested these changes because he has supported his parents for a number of years; and it is now best to move them to Bozeman, next door to him. They have requested to move the garage/apartment structure back five feet because it would be difficult to make the structure smaller and still accommodate his parents. Also, by shifting this structure to the back, it will create a minimal view imposition since the back will be blocked off by the house and vegetation. Responding to Commissioner Youngman, Assistant Planner Kozub stated there would be a difference of 320 square feet from the originally approved garage structure and the one currently proposed. No further public comment was received. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Cetraro, seconded by Commissioner Youngman, that the Certificate of Appropriateness requested by Roberty Doughtery for Nick Zelver and Aida Murga under Application No. Z-03268, to allow the construction of a new residence and garage with apartment on the second floor on Lots 17 through 18A, Block D, Beall's Second Addition, with deviations from Section 18.18.030 of the Bozeman Municipal Code, to allow two residential units on a lot that is 4% feet narrower than the required 60-foot width; from Section 18.18.050, to allow the main residence to encroach 2 feet into the required 20- foot front yard setback; from Section 18.50.060.C., to allow the main residence to encroach 5 feet and the garage to encroach 10 feet into the required 15-foot corner side yard setback; from Section 18.50.11 O.B., to allow a backing distance of less than the required 26 feet; and from Section 18.50.11 O.F., to allow one less parking space than required, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The proposed garage/apartment shall be located 10 feet from the corner side property line to match the corner side-yard set back of the main residence. 2. The proposed fence must maintain the required street vision triangle as specified in Section 18.50.080. 3. The applicant shall install boulevard trees along East Villard Street and North Black Avenue at one tree per fifty linear feet (50') of street frontage. The trees shall be installed within the property line. Applicant shall contact the Building Division to obtain the necessary boulevard tree permits. The applicant shall ensure that all boulevard trees are located a minimum of 10 feet from any service line (i.e. water, sewer, utility line). 4. The applicant shall apply for a Sidewalk and/or Driveway and Curb Cut Permit from the City of Bozeman Engineering Department prior to driveway installation. 5. Prior to building permit approval, the applicants shall apply for water and sewer permits, subject to approval by the Water and Sewer Department. The water line for the accessory structure may tie into the existing line for the main structure behind the water meter and backflow protection; however, the sewer line must be separate. 12-08-03 ..-.-........--..-.-- --------- - 13 - 6. The applicant shall obtain a building permit and pay all required fees within one year of Certificate of Appropriateness approval or this approval shall become null and void. 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 18.62.040 of the Bozeman zone code. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown, and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. Break - 7:24 Dm to 7:29 Dm Mayor Kirchhoff declared a break from 7:24 pm to 7:29 pm to allow staff time to set up their presentation visuals. Public hearina - Bozeman Creek Neiahborhood Plan. a sub-area master Dlan for the area aenerallv Ivina south of East Story Street. north of Kaav Boulevard. west of South Church Avenue and east of South Rouse Avenue and the Gallaaator Trail linear Dark (P-02047) This was the time and place set for the public hearing on the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, a sub-area master plan for the area generally lying south of East Story Street, north of Kagy Boulevard, west of South Church Avenue and east of South Rouse Avenue and the Gallagator Trail linear park, as proposed by the City of Bozeman under Application No. P-02047. Mayor Kirchhoff opened the public hearing. Associate Planner Sanford provided a brief overview of this project, noting in 2002 the Commission requested a plan be developed for the area south of East Story Street, north of Kagy Boulevard, west of South Church Street, and east of the Gallagator Linear Trail and South Rouse Avenue. This Commission direction was in response to development proposals within this area, and the significant opposition against those development proposals by current area residents. This plan is a proactive plan intended to direct and shape the growth and development of the study area. Planning staff held a half-day planning charrette and used questionnaires and many public meetings to solicit public opinion. All materials have been available on the City website for public perusal. During this time, the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association was formed, and they have held several meetings since their formation. The Planning Board voted to approve the goals and objectives listed in the plan and endorsed land use alternative number 1 by an eight to one vote. Assistant Planner Kozub presented an overview of the land use alternatives. Alternative number one is the conservation alternative and is shown as figure 13 in the plan. The concept is to maximize the amount of open space while allowing nodes of development. The residential infill development would occur north of Ice Pond Road, north of Kagy Boulevard, and east of Bozeman Creek. Public trails are critical to the success of this alternative. Also included are two potential parking areas; one off of Garfield Street and one off of Lincoln Street. Planner Kozub noted alternative number two is shown as figure 14 in the plan. This concept would promote low-density, infill development throughout the study area, while protecting the Bozeman Creek corridor. There would be similar trail connections to those outlined in alternative number one. A formal city park is included and is located south of the Boys and Girls Club property and west of Bozeman Creek. This alternative would probably require the installation of at least one east/west connector street, between South Rouse Avenue and South Church Avenue, and a parking area. Also one north/south street is proposed. Alternative number three was outlined by the Assistant Planner, who noted it is shown as figure 15 in the plan. This alternative calls for higher densities, while still protecting the Bozeman Creek riparian 12-08-03 -- --.--- .--------- - 14 - corridor. This plan would likely require the installation of at least two connector streets between South Rouse Avenue and South Church Avenue and one north/south street. As noted by the Assistant Planner, alternative number one, the conservation alternative, calls for one easUwest road connection, Ice Pond Road. The preferred alternative, figure 16, is similar to alternative number one but calls for three easUwest connectors between South Rouse Avenue and South Church Avenue; Ice Pond Road, Garfield Street, and Lincoln Street. The existing City and County zoning designations are shown on the preferred alternative. Mayor Kirchhnoff noted the preferred alternative has the zoning designations included on its map, and alternative number two shows more land to be developed, with fewer transportation connectors. He asked which alternative is closest to the actual zoning that currently exists. Assistant Planner Kozub replied that none of the alternatives are exactly the same; the densities are different between County and City zoning. A combination of the preferred alternative and alternative number two would be the closest. Mayor Kirchhoff then recognized that if the preferred alternative 0 r alternative number 0 ne is adopted, landowners may need to be made whole or may need to be compensated. Provisions will have to be made to pay down development expectations, and this portion of the plan is missing. He asked if there is a mechanism outlined for compensating landowners and delineating where that money would come from. Assistant Planner Kozub noted the implementation strategies are contained in section 5.2 of the plan and include purchasing development rights, obtaining conservation easements, obtaining trail easements, acquiring fee titles, establishing a special improvement district, an open space bond, private funding, property swaps, transfer of development rights (TDR), Gallatin County open space grants, Gallatin County park development funds, Federal land and water conservation funds, mitigation funds, and wetland and riparian restoration funds. The Assistant Planner acknowledged that at this time no monies have been set side. If alternative number one orthe preferred alternative is adopted, Assistant Planner Kozub stated the Gallatin Valley Land Trust will assist with parkland transferring, trail easements, and conservation easements. There had been some discussion between Gallatin Valley Land Trust and property owners regarding conservation easements prior to this neighborhood planning process. Staff Attorney Cooper reviewed his memo, which was prepared as a rough outline of possible legal implications for the Commission. In that memo, the Staff Attorney noted that in Montana, a growth policy is not a regulatory document and a governing body may not withhold, deny, or impose conditions on any land use approval based solely on compliance with a growth policy. A plan, by itself, cannot constitute a regulatory taking. The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan is not a regulatory document, and a "taking" can occur only when a plan is implemented through a regulatory device such as a zoning or subdivision decision. It is that act that effectuates the "taking", not the plan itself. Mayor Kirchhoff clarified that adopting this plan is not a "taking". Staff Attorney Cooper responded that adopting a plan such as this Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan would almost never be a "taking". This is not a regulatory document; it is simply a plan, and it acts as an accurate survey of the existing conditions and land uses. The Mayor then asked that in the event the Commission adopts alternative number one or the preferred alternative, would it be true that adoption of that plan, with its reference to maps, would do nothing to the current zoning. The zoning would remain regardless of the plan adopted. Staff Attorney Cooper replied that is correct; the zoning would not go away. Mayor Kirchhoff then asked if people owning property in the areas designated as open space would still need to be made whole. Staff Attorney Cooper stated those property owners are still entitled to come to the City or the County and ask that they be allowed to put their land to use as outlined by the underlying zoning. Mayor Kirchhoff noted he wasn't implying that someone would be impeded from going through the planning process. However, if the preferred alternative plan is adopted, and if the City were to deny a property owner a development opportunity based on that plan, could the City become engaged in a legal battle? The Staff Attorney responded that the City could, indeed, find itself in a legal battle. To deny a proposed use based solely on the adoption of this neighborhood plan is not something the City is allowed to do. Chapter 5, however, does provide a large number of available strategies that may serve as incentives to landowners as alternatives to full development. The Mayor then asked if it would be fair to say that as a property owner, the City must approve your development application or somehow make you whole. If 12-08-03 ..-..-....- - 15 - there is no resource to make the landowner whole, then the City must approve the development, assuming it meets the planning process criteria. In some sense the City has to satisfy the landowner's development right expectations. Staff Attorney Cooper stated Mayor Kirchhoff was generally correct in his assessment; however, he cautioned that the terminology "made whole" is not accurate. Landowners cannot insist on being permitted "highest and best use" of their property and must necessarily expect the use of their property to be restricted to some extent by reasonable government regulations. This plan promotes permissible public goals, including open space, and mechanisms for purchasing all the development rights of particular parcels. 1ft he 0 wner 0 f that p articular parcel is disinclined to sell 0 r transfer a II 0 f his development rights, he cannot be made to do so by this plan. In that instance the landowner could put his property to the uses allowed by the applicable zoning. Planning Director Epple noted the Planning Board also spent a lot of time on that issue. The overview in Chapter 5 states this is a vision for the future, not a regulatory document. The Planning Board was concerned with the possible conflict this vision creates with zoning, which is why the preferred alternative came forward. What the Planning Board did was propose the preferred alternative, while recognizing development rights of the landowners must be honored ifthe plan meets planning requirements. Planning Director Epple noted Chapter 5 of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan states "The plan also recognizes that property owners have development rights based on current zoning, and these property owners will be allowed to develop their land if they comply with applicable City and/or County land development regulations." The Chapter 5 overview states, "The full realization of the vision of this plan will only be achieved through years of diligent work by public/private partnerships." The Planning Board felt this is not something the city has the ability to make happen; it will require a public/profit partnership. It will also require a lot of work by the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Group to make this plan happen. Commissioner Brown added he believes there could be some confusion over the Planning Board votes. The Planning Board's initial vote was in favor of alternative number one; and the most recent Planning Board vote was to unanimously recommend the preferred alternative, which wasn't on the drawing board at the time of the initial vote. Commissioner Youngman referred to written testimony received which brought up the installation of a 21-inch sewer trunk main and the all-weather road required to maintain it. She asked what those improvements will entail, and how it will affect property that is already developed. Associate Planner Sanford responded that when the wastewater facility plan was adopted in 1998, it called for the installation of a 21-inch sewer trunk main that would be run through the Bozeman Creek corridor. The City's facility plan calls for that line to be constructed in 2008 or 2009. Engineering staff has indicated this line needs to be constructed between Bozeman Creek and South Rouse Avenue; it wouldn't be cost efficient to put it anywhere else. However, at this time it is impossible to say exactly where in that area it will be placed. Commissioner Youngman noted it wouldn't necessarily have to be directly next to the creek then. Associate Planner Sanford replied as close to the creek as possible is the preferred placement because of the lower grade. This line needs to be able to serve the properties to the east of the creek. Commissioner Youngman asked about the homes already occupied, and how this would affect those properties. The Associate Planner responded that when this project is designed, that is one factor that will need to be considered. The City will have to negotiate with each property owner to get the appropriate easements for the trunk line. The all-weather road will be 12-foot wide and is the standard road required for access to this facility. The use of this road as a trail is only an idea; it could be used exclusively by City crews to access the sewer main. Commissioner Youngman asked how installing a road so close to the creek complies with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan. Associate Planner Sanford recognized the road could be constructed in the floodplain, but it is impossible to say how close it will be to the creek. The sewer trunk main will be underground, so the road will be the only thing possibly in conflict with the 2020 Plan. If the road is only used by City crews, it won't have as large an impact as a trail. The sewer trunk main installation was included in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan because it will eventually occur, and the people in this area need to be aware of it. While the plan does state the all-weather road could double as a trail, it is only a possibility; it is not stated explicitly. Commissioner Hietala inquired about the capacity of the existing sewer mains. Planning Director Epple replied according to modeling and studies undertaken, engineers estimate there is capacity in the South Rouse Avenue sewer main for perhaps 12 more homes in the corridor. Anything beyond that will 12-08-03 - - --------- - 16 - have to be studied much more carefully. There is also the potential that nothing more can be tied into that sewer main until significant changes have been made or the 21-inch sewer main is installed. Planning Director Epple noted the Manion family has submitted a formal application for construction of two duplexes, in addition to their residence. Staff has not taken the position that development cannot occur, but there will be ongoing discussions regarding providing access to the properties to the north. The trail corridor will be discussed as well. This development is going to occur in an area designated as "green" in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan. Staff believes this property can be developed with the current sewer capacity. Commissioner Brown asked what kind of access is proposed. Planning Director Epple replied there is direct frontage onto Lincoln Street, which is already publicly-owned tracts for rights-of-way to connect South Rouse Avenue to South Church Avenue. The City must ensure access is provided to the property owner to the north. Planning Director Epple indicated the Planning Board was very careful when planning the east/west connectors shown on the preferred alternative. Those connectors will be Garfield Street and Lincoln Street, extended to South Church Avenue. Also, according to the Planning Board, Ice Pond Road should be a connector extended to South Rouse Avenue. Commissioner Cetraro noted staff had worked with a subcommittee and asked what that subcommittee's duties were. Associate Planner Sanford responded the subcommittee staff worked with was a subcommittee of the Planning Board. Planning Board frequently does this because it is easier for staff to work with a smaller group. Staff met with this group on a regular basis; and they had discussions on what staff was working on at that time, until the plan was in good shape before taking it to the whole of the Planning Board. This is frequently done to cut down on the workload of the full Planning Board. The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Group had no formal representation on the subcommittee. Brock Albin, 306 South 8 Avenue, stated he owns four acres south of the Martel property. He is concerned there will be pretextual denial of developments in this area. He believes there are going to be people bringing proposals to the Planning Department that are consistent with current zoning that will be denied. He said it also concerns him that there is no accurate portrayal of the current uses of this land. As shown in the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, figure 2 shows vacant land, as depicted in white; but that land is not vacant. It is completely covered with four buildings, and he showed the Commission photos of this land. He asserted this land is in constant use. Therefore, this plan does not accurately portray this land; and that is a necessity for this plan to be credible. Mr. Albin recommended the inclusion of very strong additional language to encourage everyone to not deny development based on this plan or any pretext. He said he is pro-conservation, but he is afraid this proposal may deny people environmental friendly uses. The land he owns in this area has been in his family for more than 40 years; and he has had a dream for more than 15 years of building a home there, and a second house to pay for the first. He stated he is afraid he is going to be denied his dream based on this plan, with lip service to a pretext, such as insufficient sewer capacity. He closed by saying payment for his property will not be acceptable to him. Chuck Paden, 507 Ice Pond Road, spoke on the relevance of the three proposed connector streets to the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2001 Update. He noted these connectors are opposed by virtually all residents of this area. Connector streets aren't intended to serve the people living in the area, only those passing through the area. There are no new connectors indicated in the 2001 transportation plan, as future or existing, except for South Church Avenue. Mr. Paden stated the intent of the proposed collectors is to move traffic through the study area, which implies additional traffic would originate outside of, and would pass through, those neighborhoods. With the addition of an estimated 1,300 to 1,900 new trips on Ice Pond Road, which is the traffic volume anticipated, it brings the total number of trips to above 2,000 per day on Ice Pond Road. This is above the threshold outlined in the transportation plan for collectors. These proposed "local streets" will, in fact, be serving as de facto collectors, which is in direct conflict with the 2001 transportation plan and should be eliminated. Mr. Paden stated the reason these new collectors are being proposed is to move traffic from South Rouse Avenue to South Church Avenue. Most of this traffic will be pushed to Garfield Street, which will make traffic congestion worse on Willson Avenue, particularly the left turns. Also these new collectors will make traffic on South Church Avenue much worse. The total traffic flow on South Church Avenue could reach the 3,900 to 4,900 range, which is above the projected traffic level stated in the 2001 transportation plan for the year 2020. South Church Avenue is substandard now and is identified as being in poor condition in the transportation plan. The east/west connectors need to be eliminated to make South Church Avenue viable; and if not, no new connectors 12-08-03 .. __._n_."'. - 17 - should be considered until South Church Avenue has been upgraded to at least the minimum standard for a two-lane urban collector. Janis Bullock, 507 Ice Pond Road, also addressed east/west connectivity issues, stating the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan shows connectors installed only as they may be needed. In reality, it is Ice Pond Road that will be used as a connector in the foreseeable future, which doesn't make sense and will cause more problems than will be solved. Ms. Bullock referred to a memo received from Associate Planner Sanford, in which the Associate Planner states staff believes Ice Pond Road should form the east- west connector street. This recommendation is based on further development; therefore, this condition could be met within the next year because of forthcoming development. Ms. Bullock noted the intersection of South Church Avenue and Ice Pond Road is a blind intersection, and bicycle and pedestrian traffic on South Church Avenue will be negatively impacted as well as vehicular traffic. She then distributed and reviewed photos taken by residents living on Ice Pond Road, noting the condition and width of South Church Avenue. She closed by saying the Conditional Use Permit for the property at the west end of Ice Pond Road was previously approved, and one of the conditions of approval was prohibiting the connection of South Rouse Avenue and Ice Pond Road. She stated the City should refrain from making any recommendation for Ice Pond Road as a through street until a total impact study has been conducted and an in-depth assessment has been completed by Planning staff for Ice Pond Road. Frank Munshower, 1407 South Bozeman Avenue, 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, 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 within a reasonable time 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 Improvement District; elimination of the east/west connector street; and no increased traffic on South Church Avenue. The Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association includes property owners from South Church Avenue to the Gallagator Trail and the north end of the study area to Kagy Boulevard. The Association believes there is room for compromise with the property owners and the conservation area, although the members of the Association believe it will cost them to make this plan happen. However, without the open space the whole development plan will collapse. Brian Close, 406 East Olive Street, said in terms of planning this is a visionary document; but the implementation strategies outlined in Chapter 5 are terms of engagement. No property owner should give up their development rights without compensation. A Transfer of Development Rights Board is being created by the County, and he suggested perhaps the City should be participating in that board. There are a lot of issues that could be worked out with assistance from the City. Mr. Close stated that two things need to be done: a grant needs to be secured for the appraisal of development rights, and the landowners need to be kept locked in a room with a mediator until issues have been resolved. While most neighborhood groups have been formed to stop something, this one has been formed to create something. Mr. Close recognized resources are limited, but he encouraged the City to look at this situation and define where it could help. He said he would be willing to volunteer his time to help. He noted he has never been a fan of an Ice Pond Road connection, but he thinks there are legitimate concerns with both South Church Avenue and South Willson Avenue. Mr. Close suggested the City consider deferring any connections until improvements are implemented on South Church Avenue. The City should not be in the business of denying people their zoning or development rights. Road access and sewer limitations are impediments to those property owners wishing to develop. This Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan has created a fair process, has gotten the neighbors talking to one another, and will give the property owners guidelines on which to act, if it is passed. Gary Gullickson, 404 South Church Avenue, said they are not a formal g roup yet, just some neighbors getting together to talk around the campfire. However, they soon will be formalized. Bozeman isn't becoming the most livable place for people in this area because of changes on South Church Avenue, particularly the traffic. Mr. Gullickson stated this informal group is thoroughly enthralled with all the effort that has been put into this plan. In the long run, it is in the best interest of the community to consider this proposal and direct it through successfully. But, there are several things to consider; one is that the proposed connector streets don't need to exist. South Church Avenue is the most unique street in town; it has character to it. Connector streets will destroy the mission statement of the City; to design streets with character. South Church Avenue is currently a speedway and usage of the swimming pool went up 1000 12-08-03 -- ------- - 18 ~ swimmers this year. Mr. Gullickson said the neighbors all support the park and want its use to be continued. Peets Hill is a success; there are cars are parked everywhere. The informal neighborhood group would like to have some new things, like turning circles, to stop the speeding on South Church Avenue. Jaclyn Katz, 405 Ice Pond Road, said she is authorized to speak for her immediate neighbors on Ice Pond Road, as well as those property owners close by; and she is here to speak against all connector streets in this area. During the charrette process the neighbors were given the opportunity to vote on several options, but they were never given the option of zero connector streets; and she feels it is very important for the Commission to be aware of that. At the Planning Department meeting held several weeks ago landowners spoke their minds and various issues were brought forward, but not one word was spoken in favor of connector streets. Ms. Katz said that at that meeting Planning Director Epple made a very weak proposal for connector streets by saying this is the way it's done in new subdivisions. However, this is a 40 to 50-year-old neighborhood that is being transformed into a subdivision, and it is probably the only one in the county. According to comments made by Planning Director Epple at that meeting, all streets could potentially become connector or collector streets. Also during that meeting, a Planning Board member said connector streets would allow fire protection and emergency vehicles to arrive more quickly. Ms. Katz said the City doesn't need to turn their street into a throughway so that a fire truck can arrive a couple of minutes earlier. Fire safety is a non-issue to property owners there; they have assumed that risk. This proposal will reduce their property values, and they equate that to denying their development rights. Ms. Katz stated the Commission will hear tonight that Mr. Hugh Reid has no problems with crash gates at the base of South Church Avenue and Ice Pond Road. She noted South Church Avenue isn't safe now, and it will only get worse with an increase of traffic. South Willson Avenue will also have additional traffic generated, particularly those desiring to turn left. She doesn't believe any Commissioner wants to see someone injured or killed so they can get between Garfield Street and Main Street easier. She closed by saying there should be no connector streets created until South Church Avenue has been widened and/or straightened. Joby Sabol, 225 East Mendenhall, stated he is present to speak on behalf of Bart and Berit Manion, who are his clients and friends. His purpose in speaking tonight is to persuade the City to proceed slowly with this plan. The Manion property is not only prime for development, but before the Manion's purchased it, it was approved for development but that plan was never followed through. The Manions paid a purchase price that was based on the ability to development that property. Their application is for four units, in addition to the existing units currently on the property. "Takings" have been discussed, and this plan cloaks it as the purchase of development rights; however, it is still talking about taking somebody's property rights, which is a key component. It is critical this Commission has a handle on this aspect of the plan before it is adopted in any form. Mr. Sabol referred to Section 4.1.2, which refers to purchasing the development rights for land to be protected and purchasing easements on unprotected land. There is no value estimated for purchasing those development rights, and it is folly to go forward without knowing what those costs and expenses are. Those costs can't be summed up merely as development rights; there also are legal costs and other costs associated with administering that process. If the landowners disagree with the amount of compensation offered, there will be lawsuits filed over condemnation and eminent domain. Until the City has a handle on those costs, the Commission is not in a position to vote on this plan. Mr. Sabol closed by saying this is not really a plan because it doesn't tell you how to get from point A to point B with all information provided. Jason Cutts, 202 West Madison, Belgrade, stated Bill and Pam Phillips asked him to speak on their behalf. They, too, are asking the City to proceed very slowly. This is a complex issue with large and expensive ramifications. Time could be better spent right now figuring out how to purchase the development rights, particularly since a lot of the property affected is county property and the County hasn't been very involved. Mr. Cutts urged the City to become actively involved with the County on this issue. Lowell Springer, Ice Pond Development architect, said he owns property, with the creek running through it, in this area. The neighbors have had several long meetings, with help from The Community Mediation Center, and they came to a substantial agreement regarding how development may go forward on Ice Pond Road. A big part of that agreement has to do with concerns regarding the use of Ice Pond Road as a through street. Mr. Springer urged the Commission to think about the consensus of the people in that immediate area; that Ice Pond Road not be developed as a through street. They believe that adequate access can be provided without Ice Pond Road being a through street. Mr. Springer then addressed neighborhood concerns with the riparian corridors, which need to be preserved. He said he doesn't believe there is a great window of opportunity to preserve this area for future generations. The county-wide open space referendum was passed, and this preservation would be an appropriate use of those funds. 12-08-03 - 19 - Break 8:50 pm - 8:58 pm The Mayor declared a break from 8:50 pm until 8:58 pm in accordance with Commission policy. Public hearina - Bozeman Creek Neiahborhood Plan. a sub-area master plan for the area aenerallv Ivina south of East StOry Street. north of Kaav Boulevard. west of South Church Avenue and east of South Rouse Avenue and the Gallaaator Trail linear park lP-02047) Bart Manion, 405 East Lincoln Street, said he was here to present the Manion alternative. He stated he bought his property in 1998 and had to pay more for it because of the previous development that was proposed and approved. The area has changed; and now NorthWestern Energy has a proposal to expand their substation, which will require an extensive amount of work in their front yard. Therefore, they decided it was time to coordinate their construction schedule with that of NorthWestern Energy. Mr. Manion said he is also speaking on behalf of his two neighbors; they have a three-neighbor plan. They are proposing to build four condominiums on their property, in addition to their house and guest house, and the property owners to the north also plan to construct four condominium units. They are willing to put 70 percent of their property in a conservation easement. Currently they are working with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust to determine the dimensions of trails and the Lincoln Street right-of-way trailhead. They are also working with NorthWestern Energy to restore the stream banks. Mr. Manion noted they have been working on this plan for a year, and they believe it is a great one. They are open to suggestions from the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Association, Planning staff, and the Commissioners as to how they can proceed with their plan. This plan provides great access, has the proper zoning, and is in line with the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan for infill densities. They are concerned with the alternative number 1 conservation plan. There is no projection of the costs incurred from purchasing development rights or easement rights. They, too, do not want to see connectivity of South Rouse Avenue to South Church Avenue. Ted Lange, Gallatin Valley Land Trust, said they got involved in this discussion at the beginning of the summer when four landowners, Heckerman, Phillips, Reiser, and Evans, whose property is in the county, approached them. He believes the open space corridor will be an asset to the community. Mr. Lange said it is apparent there are major cost barriers to realizing this vision, and it will require teamwork between all parties to make this possible. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust Board has authorized staff to work with all interested parties to make this plan come together, and he is willing to put time and effort into this. The Gallatin Valley Land Trust is supporting the preferred alternative; however, their support is based on the understanding they will be working with willing landowners and this plan will not diminish property owners' rights. Mr. Lange noted the three main issues appear to be the need for stronger language to assure property owners their rights won't be diminished in any way, street connections, on which Gallatin Valley Land Trust has no position at all, and the sewer main. There are places in the plan outlining how the sewer main could double as a trail, but the landowners would be strongly opposed to that line as a trail. Gallatin Valley Land Trust intends to negotiate a trail that is more aesthetic. John Maykuth, 905 South Church Avenue, said he has lived there since 1938. Residents of this area allowed their property to be annexed into the city based on the promise of city water and sewer service. After annexation, they were told it was too expensive to provide them with city services, and things have gone downhill ever since. This plan will make property that was once productive virtually useless because of the setbacks, and the property owners will still have to pay high taxes and street and tree maintenance fees. New connectors will increase traffic on a street where the average speed is already 35 miles per hour in a 25 miles per hour zone. Mr. Maykuth said to add more traffic on South Church Avenue is not feasible; the street is currently at its capacity. A detailed traffic study needs to be conducted before South Church Avenue is included in this plan. Randy Johnson, 2018 South Rouse Avenue, stated he is present to support the planning process. This process helps to achieve a vision for the community, including those in the planning area and those adjacent to the planning area. He noted this property has a lot of physical limitations, including high ground water, configuration issues, and infrastructure issues. Mr. Johnson characterized the potential to purchase development rights as a win/win situation. People should have the right to build a home on their own land, but they also need to be allowed the opportunity to define, evaluate, and value development rights to give the City an opportunity to purchase those. People in the surrounding area are willing to financially contribute to make that happen. There are also lots of resources available in the county to make that happen. Mr. 12-08-03 -.-..-..-.-.-..-- - 20- Johnson encouraged the Commission to move forward in adopting this plan. He suggested appointing a task force to evaluate the value of development rights and how to purchase those. Mr. Johnson said he has been doing this work professionally for 15 years, and Planning staff has done a fabulous job on this project. Jennifer Madgic, Gallatin County Planning Department and representing the County, said she does like the spirit of the preferred alternative and suggestions made have been sound. The County is in the process of looking at the donut regulation and updating it. They have purposefully excluded this area because the City is working on it. Part of the donut regulation update will be a Transfer of Development Rights program, which is in the beginning stages. Ms. Madgic encouraged the City to be involved in that process. She has been told this property will have a tough time meeting the criteria for the open space grants program. However, the County could be open to other alternatives for funding. Since there were no Commissioner objections, Mayor Kirchhoff closed the pUblic hearing. Mayor Kirchhoff stated he is very appreciative to be in meetings like this and to have the opportunity to do something that is positive. The conservation alternative is the ideal plan, but he is also mindful of those who want to develop their property and their right to do so. Mayor Kirchhoff said he would like to see additional language included in this plan that states in no way does this plan diminish the development right potential of the property owners. He said he is encouraged the County is trying to make a Transfer of Development Rights program work, but he is also mindful those programs are at least one year out. Mayor Kirchhoff said he would like to adopt the preferred alternative plan with the intention of preserving the riparian corridor, as long as it is made perfectly clear that this is a planning document only. However, more needs to be done, and the neighbors are willing to do more. More detailed conversations need to be held regarding connectors and sewer lines. Commissioner Cetraro stated he is not in favor of acting on this plan this evening, and he would like to see this plan come forward with more neighborhood recommendations. In response to Mayor Kirchhoff, Commissioner Cetraro said there are too many unanswered questions, and the Commission needs direction from legal staff regarding the potential of litigation. He would prefer to take this planning process slower so the neighborhood can come forward and complete the plan. Plans have been forged to include private property without the landowners' comments and participation. Commissioner Youngman asked if all property owners, both city and county residents, were invited to participate in this planning process. She also inquired if all people came to at least some of the meetings. Assistant Planner Kozub replied all property owners were invited, but some landowners did not respond to any invitations to participate. Commissioner Cetraro said the Commission has received some information that not all property owners were invited to participate. Assistant Planner Kozub responded some people feel they haven't been adequately invited or involved in the Bozeman Neighborhood Creek Association, not the City-sponsored events. Those are two distinct groups. City Manager Johnson asked how the meetings were noticed. Assistant Planner Kozub stated letters were sent announcing the charrette and land use meetings, postcards were sent as well as letters to property owners within the study area and those within 200 feet of the study area, and notices were published in the Chronicle. Commissioner Youngman noted if the Commission makes revisions to this plan, they should be well written and specific. She said several additions need to be added based on the testimony received and the sewer trunk language also needs to be revised. There are several street issues that need to be resolved, and there needs to be reassuring language added regarding a traffic study and pUblic safety issues. Commissioner Youngman stated she supports adding property rights and transfer of development rights language, with wording from legal staff that would be appropriate. She asked if the Commission could provide staff with general direction now for revisions and additions, and then review the changes after they are written. Commissioner Youngman voiced her support for the preferred alternative, although she has concerns with impacts of, and safety issues with, the connector streets. She referred to a letter signed by the property owners in support of the preferred alternative, saying there is an expectation there that the City will provide all leadership for the realization of this plan, which is completely unrealistic. It is unrealistic to expect the City to coordinate and champion fund raising efforts for the acquisition of development rights. She used Tuckerman Park as an example of a project where the City did not provide direct leadership or manage the fundraising, noting it was a successful individual-led project. The City needs to make it clear 12-08-03 - 21 - from the beginning how far it is able to go with this process, and what is needed from the community to make this plan a reality. Commissioner Brown stated his agreement with comments made by Commissioner Youngman. He pointed out the Commission has had an opportunity to review the minutes of the Planning Board meeting of November 18, 2003 and noted several members wanted a motion to give this plan top priority. However, the rest of the Planning Board felt it is unrealistic to expect staff to carry this project. Commissioner Brown commended Planning staff, saying they have done an admirable job of getting this plan to this point, and the amount of staff time spent on this project can be justified because this is a new process. Commissioner Hietala stated he believes the pace of this process needs to be slowed down a little bit. There should be an effort made to further quantify the alternative costs and to define any legal ramifications of this plan. He suggested taking two or three months to move this process forward and refine it since this is a first-time effort. Mayor Kirchhoff noted Gallatin Valley Land Trust has stated they would only work with willing participants, so no one is compelled to go to any alternative route; development of this area by property owners will continue if all conditions are met and the zoning is appropriate. Mayor Kirchhoff then called a ttention to the following items, which require further discussion: alternatives, connectors, Ice Pond Road status, Church Avenue improvements, sewer mains, and ways for the neighborhood to work with the county committee on transfer of development rights. He also suggested one of the City Planners could be the city liaison to the county committee working on transfer of development rights. Commissioner Cetraro asked for an update on the $5.7 million listed in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan, 2001 Update for improvements to South Church Avenue, noting the improvements to that street will be a huge part of the plan. Currently the City doesn't have rights-of-way, and the improvements can't be made without them. Commissioner Cetraro then asked where the estimated $10 million pricetag for the purchase of the necessary land and the building of the road fall in the Capital Improvement Program. Mayor Kirchhoff pointed out this plan is not a trigger mechanism for anything; it is only a vision. Approval of this plan doesn't trigger improvements to South Church Avenue or any other Capital Improvement Program project. Commissioner Cetraro stated the City can't predict when South Church Avenue is going to be upgraded to urban collector standard, so language of the plan could be revised to state connector streets are not intended to be connected to South Church Avenue until it has been brought up to urban collector standard, which could be 15 to 20 years. It will be very difficult and very expensive to improve South Church Avenue. Commissioner Cetraro suggested where critical conditions exist and where the level of service failures occur is at intersections, so it might be possible to make substantial improvements to the intersections without compromising the level of service for the street. The Commission doesn't need to specify South Church Avenue be upgraded to urban collector standard; that could be left to future Commissions. Responding to Mayor Kirchhoff, Commissioner Cetraro stated connectors proposed in this plan could be stricken, but if that is done it will eliminate connectors as a future option for all intents; and the Planning Board doesn't want to see that loss of connectivity. Mayor Kirchhoff asked if there is a proposed alternative that three of the Commissioners could support. Three Commissioners agreed to support the preferred alternative, with revisions to some of the language contained therein. Following Commission discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Youngman, seconded by Commissioner Hietala, to direct staff to bring back a resolution enacting the Preferred Alternative of the Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan, including the following revisions: add to end of section 1.0, "This plan is not intended to legally impact the right of property owners to use their land." Add to end of section 4.1, "If efforts to preserve open space under this alternative are not fully realized, regular land use regulations will apply." 12-08-03 ------.- - 22- to 5.2, number 15, "Once the planned 21-inch sewer trunk is installed in a location along Bozeman Creek that minimizes the negative impacts on riparian habitat and vegetation, encourage property owners east of the creek to annex to the city and connect to the City wastewater system." to 5.2, number 27, "Connector streets are not intended to be connected to South Church Avenue until it has been brought up to urban collector standard as recommended in the Greater Bozeman Area Transportation Plan 2001 Update." to dedicate City staff member to work with the County committee on Transfer of Development Rights program. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Brown, and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No being Commissioner Hietala and Commissioner Cetraro. Mayor Kirchhoff commended staff and those in attendance for this cooperative effort and for staff's hard work on this plan. Presentation re proposed Wheatland Apartment proiect/reauest for use of affordable housina monies Included in the Commissioners' packets were a copy of Mr. Squire's power point presentation, a summary of this project prepared by Mr. Squire, and letters of recommendation from Eagle Mount and Reach, Incorporated. Mr. Squire provided an overview of this proposal, saying there isn't any controversy on this issue; Bozeman needs affordable housing. The Bozeman area economy is largely service oriented, which are still low-paying jobs. In 1990 families constituted 52 percent of all Bozeman households, and many of them are low to moderate income households. Mr. Squire noted the Bozeman needs assessment has guided the priorities of this project. Research shows there is a strong demand for this project. All low income and senior projects are filled and some have small waiting lists. The projected growth rate for Bozeman will increase the demand to another 700 units for low-income housing in the next 5 years. The greatest demand is in the 40 percent Area Median Income (AMI), 1 bedroom, single head-of-household, and senior units, and by far the greatest gap is housing for mentally disabled individuals. Mr. Squire suggested the best solution for Bozeman is for the City to loan big box dollars to developers who provide affordable housing to persons with incomes below the 40 percent AMI level. He also suggested the City apply for a HOME grant and loan those dollars to developers who agree to guarantee extended affordability of the units for target income populations. Those monies would be used in combination with low-income housing tax credits. Mr. Squire continued by referring to his power point presentation, noting Wheatland Apartments LLC is requesting a grant for 2003 of $100,000 in big box exactions and a $500,000 federal HOME grant written by the City of Bozeman and structured as a loan to Wheatland, LLC. Wheatland, LLC will pay for the grant writing and annual administration expenses of the grant. They are also requesting written Commission endorsement of their project, as well as the waiving of all building permit fees possible. In return for the granting of these monies, Wheatland, LLC will give the City of Bozeman a 31-year guarantee on 18 one- bedroom apartments at 40 percent AMI. Mr. Squire said they are not doing exclusively low-income rentals; they are integrating with other income levels. Amenities include a full appliance package, carports, a community room, and disabled units that are fully ADA and Fair Housing compliant. Of the 72 total units,18 are targeted at 40 percent AMI, 24 units at 50 percent AMI, and 30 units at 60 percent AMI. Mr. Squire pointed out they plan to break ground in September 2004 and begin renting in late June of 2005. This will be Bozeman's only low-income project allowing pets. Mr. Squire noted endorsements for this project have also been received from Congressman Rehberg and Senator Baucus. The low-income housing tax credit application needs to be submitted by January 9, 2004, which is why this request needs to be acted upon soon. Commissioner Brown asked what kind of liability the City will incur with the $500,000 HOME grant. Ms. ROberty, Human Resource Development Council, replied the grant would be made to the City, who would then loan that money to the developer. The City's liability would be guaranteeing extended affordability; however, if Mr. Squire receives his requested tax credits, the Montana State Housing Board will monitor that and the grant administrator will submit the annual report. If this project would prove to be less than successful, the City would need to enter into an agreement to capture that money for commerce. Mr. Squire added this complex would have to have an awfully high vacancy rate to fail; there has been only one known failure, and that was on an Indian reservation. He added this is a $6.5 million project with $4.5 million in equity and with a 5 percent vacancy rate, they expect to bring in over $400,000 annually. 12-08-03 - 23- Responding to Commissioner Hietala, Mr. Squire noted the $100,000 will be a loan to Wheatland, LLC and will be structured so that the developer must pay interest only annually at the applied federal rate if net cash flow exceeds $45,000 annually. Ms. Roberty added the HOME grant is awarded through Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and monitoring rules have been developed by HUD. Commissioner Cetraro asked Mr. Squire if he has given a pro forma balance sheet to City staff. Mr. Squire responded he has given one to Ms. Roberty, HRDC, and to City Manager Johnson. However, the numbers have changed substantially since those were distributed, and he will be happy to share the most current numbers with the Commission as long as they aren't shared with those other than City staff. Commissioner Youngman suggested this site may provide the opportunity to use wetland credits, rather than the previously proposed South 9th Avenue park location. This site would better meet the needs of both the community and the developer. Ms. Roberty noted the two other developers requesting low-income housing tax credits aren't requesting as much from the City as this project. The other two applicants are requesting support for their tax credit applications only; they are not asking the City for loans. Next week the Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board will submit letters asking for Commission support of the three projects. Commissioner Youngman noted Mr. Squire's project is the only one asking for the $100,000 affordable housing money from the big box exactions. Ms. Roberty responded Mr. Squire's project will serve a population that no other tax credit developer has been able to serve up to this point, including the mentally disabled of this community. This project responds to a lot of the points the Bay Area Economics study brought forward. City Manager Johnson noted the City gave $100,000 to another developer to provide affordable housing units, and he questioned if the city ever got those units. He asked how this project will be different, and how this money and the housing units will be tracked. Ms. Roberty replied the Montana Board of Housing will place restrictive covenants on this property, and they will also monitor the project every year for compliance. The Montana Board of Housing was not involved in the other project mentioned, and it is unknown where that money was spent. Discussion ~ Dolicy for aDDrOyal of reauests for City monies Included in the Commissioners' packets was a memo from Assistant City Manager Brey, dated December 3,2003. In his memo, Assistant City Manager Brey outlined some policy options for establishing Commission guidelines for awarding financial assistance. Also included are some suggested policy items which are intended to address many of the concerns that have been raised without disqualifying awards the Commission has made in the past. Recommendations from the Chamber of Private Enterprise are also included. It has been suggested this is an issue the City shouldn't be involved in. Assistant City Manager Brey stated the intent of his memo was to identify the kinds of awards the City has made over time, and they are identified under the applicable headings. Also identified is the range of policy options available to the Commission. The Chamber of Private Enterprise has also provided some options. Lastly, there is a list of options included for Commission consideration that don't conflict in any significant way with past awards. Assistant City Manager Brey reviewed the options outlined in his memo, noting they leave several Chamber of Private Enterprise recommendations unaddressed. This wasn't intended to be a program proposal, just an issue identification exercise. If the Commission desires to adopt a categorically structured, competitive process for awarding funds, there are a number of models available. Roger Koopman, Chamber of Private Enterprise, complimented Assistant City Manager Brey on his work, saying he had done a fine job of putting forth good options for Commission consideration. However, he believes any final action on this matter should be deferred until the new Commission is seated. He also requested the Commission deferfunding for the Gallatin Valley Independent Business Alliance (GVIBA) until the seating of the new Commission. Mr. Koopman said he would like the Commission to entertain the thought that it may not be a proper role of city government to distribute public funds to various groups and causes. The Commission needs to consider if this is the best use of public funds because the public is primarily concerned with the excellent delivery of traditional municipal services. Mr. Koopman stated that 12-08-03 u_. ._.__n__.___ - 24- when the City Commission is viewed as the last resort to keep an organization afloat or to start up a business, it can create entitlement and reliance. It doesn't matter that other cities are awarding money for these uses, it is time for the Commission to cut its own path and set its own agenda for Bozeman rather than worrying about what other cities are doing. Mr. Koopman said the general approach of Assistant City Manager Brey's memo is that the Commission not develop policies that fly in the face of grants already awarded or set policies that reflect negatively on on-going support. Mr. Koopman stated the Commission is the policy-making body and they have the opportunity to wipe the slate clean and start over, but that doesn't mean existing relationships can't be grandfathered in. At this time, the Commission would be setting future guidelines and policies. Mr. Koopman said he likes the concept of competition outlined in Assistant City Manager Brey's memo. It would enable groups coming before the Commission to respond to established, clear priorities. He also voiced support for the policy of requiring applicants to have a one-year track record, which would preclude start-up awards. Mr. Koopman recommended the Commission fund organizations that have a formal democratic structure, which would avoid funding paper organizations and narrow interest groups. He also suggested the Commission should not fund organizations that engage in lobbying, including the Chamber of Commerce. Assistant City Manager Brey said the Commission has been presented with options, areas where conflicts exist, and awards previously granted; and now staff is looking for Commission direction as to how to proceed. Commissioner Cetraro stated this memo provides the Commission with a great opportunity to start with checklists it can continue to use in the future. Responding to Commissioner Youngman and Commissioner Cetraro, Assistant City Manager Brey said criteria could be added to gauge an organization's compliance, but the Commission needs to decide what it wants to monitor. Commissioner Cetraro replied he can accept this is a "first look", but he believes this process needs to be worked on and a checklist established for granting financial assistance. In response to Commissioner Cetraro, Assistant City Manager Brey stated funding emergencies that arise come from the general fund, which is a tough place to find funds. Ideally, all funding would be included in the budget, but emergencies that fall out of the budget have been funded by the general fund. Other funds do exist that may be utilized, such as big box funds. Commissioner Cetraro asked where the requested GVIBA monies would come from, and if they have already been spent. Commissioner Youngman answered the monies would come from the big box funds, and City Manager Johnson replied the monies have been appropriated, but not spent. GVIBA will need to comply with Commission direction in this area, and their request for the funds has not yet been received. This City grant process policy needs to be developed first by the Commission before GVIBA can apply for the monies. Commissioner Cetraro questioned where the requirement for an established one-year track record is in the seven options contained in Assistant City Manager Brey's memo. The Assistant City Manager responded that precludes start-ups, which would trigger looking at programs like the park fund. However, there could be two different stipulations. City Manager Johnson added the park fund is for the improvement of park lands, and that shouldn't be viewed as granting it to any organization. That money goes to build fields that become assets to the city, rather than to buy uniforms or pay for scholarships for youths to play. Assistant City Manager Brey added that is why this issue wasn't addressed in the seven options outlined in his memo. Referring to option 7, City Manager Johnson asked if membership in an organization differs from an award to an organization, citing the Chamber of Commerce as an example. Assistant City Manager Brey responded those types of questions were raised in his memo for Commission consideration. Mayor Kirchhoff stated the seven options outlined in Mr. Brey's memo are fairly well defined; and while they might be liable to change in the future, no suggestions have been made to add or subtract items at this time. 12-08-03 . ........ -"....-....----.--... .....-- - 25- It was moved by Commissioner Hietala, seconded by Commissioner Brown, to direct staff to bring back a resolution establishing a policy and guidelines for review and award of financial assistance to organizations and individuals that includes the following elements: 1) An identified and defined pUblic interest must be addressed. 2) A formal application, including work program and budget, must be submitted within the general fund budget cycle. 3) Whether any portion of grants should be used for wages or salaries should be determined on a case-by-case basis. 4) With the exception of affordable housing projects, the applicant must demonstrate active fund-raising efforts in addition to the funds sought from the City. 5) A formal report should be submitted at the end of the project or program year which includes all information necessary to demonstrate that the funds have been appropriately utilized for the intended purposes. 6) An applicant's eligibility may be suspended for any misappropriation of funds or failure to report. Any misrepresentation or falsification results in the immediate disqualification of the applicant. 7) Awards may not be made for lobbying or other political purposes. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Hietala, Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Youngman, and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, Commissioner Cetraro. Assistant City Manager Brey stated GVIBA will be advised that these criteria have been adopted, and their application package should be submitted around these criteria. Public comment No public comment was received. Discussion. FYI Items The following "For Your Information" items were forwarded to the Commission. (1 ) Updated list of planning projects to be considered at upcoming Commission meetings, dated December 2, 2003. (2) Agenda for the School District NO.7 Board of Trustees meeting to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 8, at the Willson School. (3) Agenda for the County Commission meeting to be held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 9, at the Courthouse. (4) Agenda for the Development Review Committee meeting to beheld at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, December 9, at the Professional Building. (5) Agenda for the Design Review Board meeting to be held at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 9, at the Professional Building. (6) Newsletterfrom Headwater Recycling announcing that the next meeting will be held at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, December 11, at Wheat Montana. During his FYI, City Manager Johnson reminded the Commission there will a special afternoon session at 3:00 pm next Monday, December 15th. Planning Director Epple offered the following FYI item: The annual staff retreat will be held on Thursday, December 11th, and will focus on the Unified Development Ordinance. Assistant City Manager Brey offered the following during his FYI: There will need to be two designated Commissioners to serve on the consultant committee for big box impact proposals and parking 12-08-03 - 26- garage/retail structure proposals. Commissioner Youngman agreed to serve on the selection committee for architectural/engineering services associated with a parking/retail structure in the downtown. Commissioner Hietala agreed to serve on the selection committee for a consultant to prepare an economic and fiscal impact analysis of large-scale retail development (big box stores) and its impacts on the City of Bozeman and the community. Commissioner Brown presented the following FYI items: 1) He attended the County Commission meeting held on December 2nd. In response to a request for ~roposals from the Urban Transportation Committee, five bids were opened, with a range of $50,000 to 60,000. Those bids will be evaluated. 2) Appointees to the Public Transit Stakeholders Advisory Board will be made tomorrow, December 9th, by the County Commissioners. Adiournment - 11 :50 D.m. There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Cetraro, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Brown, Commissioner Cetraro, Commissioner Youngman, Commissioner Hietala, and Mayor Kirchhoff; those voting No, none. smd-K'~~ ATTEST: ~oI~ IN L. SULLIVAN Clerk of the Commission PREPARED BY: ~~~~~ KA EN L. DeLA THO Deputy Clerk of the Commission 12-08-03 -------------- - ----------