HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Knolls East and Highland South Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat #P-07037 dQ
v �
Commission Memorandum
Co.M
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: Tabled Item - The Knolls East and Highland South Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plat,#P-07037 (Request to remove this item from the table
and set a date of November 3,2008 for the continued public
hearing/action)
MEETING DATE: Monday, October 20, 2008, at 6:00 pm
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Commission formally remove this
item from the table and set a date of November 3, 2008 for the continued public hearing and
action.
BACKGROUND: Attached is a request from Potter Clinton Development, representing
Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, to have the Knolls East and Highland South Major
Subdivision Preliminary Plat placed back on the City Commission public hearing agenda. This
item was tabled by the City Commission, at the request of the applicant, at the November 5, 2007
public hearing. The applicant requested this action in order to have time to fully analyze the
motion (amendments) being considered by the Commission. Attached to this memorandum is a
copy/excerpt of the minutes from the November 5, 2007 meeting. The Bozeman Municipal Code
(BMC)requires that this item be acted upon within one year of the date it was tabled.
For reference, attached is a copy of the plan/map for this project. This Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plat application proposes to subdivide 214.16 acres into 337 single-household
residential lots, l multi-household residential lot, I mixed use/commercial lot, 44 attached single
household and 8 affordable housing lots and the remaining area as parks, open spaces, streets and
alleys. The subject property is annexed with preliminary zoning designations of R-1 (Residential
Single-Household, Low Density District), R-2 (Residential Two-Household, Medium Density
District), B-1 (Neighborhood Business District) and B-2 (Community Business District) and is
located north of Kagy Boulevard between Highland Boulevard and Bozeman Trail Road.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: Unless directed otherwise by the Commission, staff does not intend
to require re-notification, posting or specific advertisement of continued review and action on
this item at the November 3rd meeting. This is due to the fact that it was a tabled item and will be
announced by being placed on two agendas of the City Commission.
While staff does not recommend the Commission specifically discuss the details of the project
until the November 3rd meeting, staff would ask for some input on whether the Commission
would like to receive the entire packet of materials again. If the entire materials packet is not
needed, staff could present summary materials as appropriate,
Report compiled on October 10,2008
FISCAL EFFECTS: Fiscal impacts are undetermined at this time.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission,
CONTACT: Please feel free to email Doug Riley at drileyLibozem an.net if you have any
questions prior to the public hearing.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Epple, Planning Director Chris Kukulski, City Manager
Attachments: Excerpt/Copy of November 5, 2007 City Commission Minutes
Applicant's October G, 2008 request/materials
Copy of Plan/Map
Report compiled on October 10, 2008
LINKED MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE CITY COMMISSION
BOZEMAN, MONTANA
November 5,2007
The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in the Community Room, Gallatin County
Courthouse, 311 West Main Street, on Monday,November 5, 2007 at 6:00 pm. Present were
Mayor Jeff Krauss, Cr. Sean Becker, Cr. Jeff Rupp, Cr. Steve Kirchhoff, Cr. Kaaren Jacobson,
City Manager Chris Kukulski, Planning Director Andy Epple, Assistant City Attorney Tim
Cooper, and City Clerk Stacy Ulmen.
0:05:57 A. Call to Order-6:00 pm-Community Room, Gallatin County Courthouse,311
West Main Street
Mayor Krauss called the meeting to order at 6:03 pm.
0:06:01 B. Pledge of Allegiance and a Moment of Silence
0:07:08 C. Public Service Announcement- Mail Ballots: Get out the Vote
Clerk and Recorder Charlotte Mills gave a Public Service Announcement regarding the mail
ballot return for the public service mill levies.
0:09:34 D. Minutes -September 24,2007
0:09:38 Motion and Vote to approve the Minutes of September 24,2007.
It was moved by Cr. Becker,seconded by Cr. Rump,to approve the minutes of September
24,2007.
Those voting Ave being Crs.Becker,Rupp,Kirchhoff,Jacobson,and Mayor Krauss
Those voting No beinLy none.
The motion carried 5-0.
0:09:S2 E. Consent
1. Authorize payment of claims(LaMeres)
2. Finally adopt Ordinance No. 1723, Louis Zone Map Amendment#7-07073 (Riley)
3. Finally adopt Ordinance No,1724,MSU Foundation'Zone Map Amendment 4Z-
07157 (Riley)
4. Finally adopt Ordinance No. 1725, Schroeder Zone Map Amendment#Z-07107
(Knight)
5. Approve Park Master Plan for Diamond Estates Subdivision No. 2, Phases 3 &4
#P-05071 (Skelton)
Linked Minutes of The Bacetnan City((;nwutesrnn Afeetatq. November 5,20n
6, Authorize City Manager to sign a Sewer and Water Easement,and a Public Access
Easement with Vlaanderen Condominiums(L.F.M.S.T. LLC)(Stodola)
7. Approve Resolution No.4080,Construction Contract Change Order No, 4 Valley
Center Road/North 19th Avenue Special Improvement District Project(Stodola)
8. Authorize the City
9. Manager to sign the Durston Road Special Improvement District 684 Professional
Services Agreement Amendment No. 5 (Stodola)
10. Authorize City Manager to sign the CFT Office Building Public Street and Utility
Easement (Stodola)
11. Approve The Knolls at Hillcrest Subdivision Final Plat(Cooper)
12. Authorize City Manager to sign Contract Amendment#1 with Tindale-Oliver
Associates, Street Impact Fee Study Update(Saunders)
0:09:57 Public Comment
Mayor Krauss opened public comment.
No person commented,
Mayor Krauss closed public comment.
0:10:11 Motion and Vote to approve Consent Items E. 1-12.
It was moved by Cr.Rupp.seconded by Cr.Kirchhoff to approve Consent items E 1-12
Those voting Ave being Crs.Rupp,Kirchhoff Jacobson,Becker,and Mayor Krauss
Those voting No being none.
The Motion carried 5-0.
0:10:28 E. Public Comment
Mayor Krauss opened public comment.
0:11:09 Paul Bockus-Public Comment
Mr.Bockus of 202 North Broadway spoke regarding the vacation of the end of East Lamme
Street.
0.15:02 Jessica Roberts-Public Comment
Ms. Roberts of ALTA commented on the West Babcock Elementary School site.
0:18:55 Joe GMyin-Public Comment
Joe Gilpin of 116 North I Oth spoke regarding the West Babcock Elementary School site.
0:23:46 Public Comment closed.
Mayor Krauss closed public comment.
2
Linked AhnurCA ri The R4�ewaP1 C lth-C011)1niNW0)7 Aleetnrb, \ueemher +,2007
0:23:50 G. Mayoral Proclamation-National American Indian Heritage Month
Mayor Krauss proclaimed November as American Indian Heritage Month.
0:25:16 H. Action Items
0:25:18 1. The Knolls East and Highland South Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat
t
#P-07037(Riley)
0:26:05 Doug Riley, Associate Planner
Mr. Riley gave a Power Point presentation regarding the preliminary plat application for The
Knolls East and Highland South Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat#P-07037,
0:58:32 Jason Leep, Representative of Bozeman Deaconess Health Services
Mr. Leep gave the applicant presentation regarding the preliminary plat application for The
Knolls East and Highland South Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat 4P-07037.
1:35:27 Public Comment
Mayor Krauss opened public comment.
1:35:52 Neil Westesen -Public Comment
Mr. Westesen, Chairman of the Nordic Committee for the Bridger Ski Foundation, spoke
regarding the possible location of the operations' building for the Bridger Ski Foundation.
1:39:38 Ted Lange-Public Comment
Mr. Lange,representative of the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, spoke regarding his support of a
facility for the Bridger Ski Foundation.
1:44:12 Lucien Hand-Public Comment
Mr. Hand,of 718 North Tracy, spoke regarding his support of the development. Bicycle routes
are his main focus.
1:46:27 Public Comment closed.
Mayor Krauss closed public comment.
2:35:25 Motion to approve the variance request for asphalt instead of concrete sidewalks in
the areas designated in the application.
It was moved by Cr.Kirchhoff,seconded by Cr.Jacobson, to approve the variance request
for asphalt instead of concrete sidewalks in the areas designated in the application
3
LinAed.ifinwes nf7he B2enrart C}q C'omrnissioti Afeeling.Aoremher i.2&C
2:35:41 Discussion
2:36:41 Vote on the motion to approve the variance request for asphalt instead of concrete
sidewalks in the areas designated in the application.
Those voting Ave being Crs.Jacobson and Becker.
Those voting No being Crs. Kirchhoff,Runs,and Mayor Krauss.
The motion failed 3-2.
2:40:36 Motion to approve the variance request regarding mitigation requirements being
lifted from this application for the intersection of Haggerty and Main.
It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr.Jacobson to approve the variance request
regarding mitigation requirements being lifted from this application for the intersection of
Haggerty and Main.
2:40:54 Discussion
2:42:52 Vote on the motion to approve the variance request regarding mitigation
requirements being lifted from this application for the intersection of Haggerty and Main.
Those voting Ave being Crs.Jacobson,Becker,and Mayor Krauss.
Those voting No being Crs.Kirchhoff and Rupp.
The motion carried 3-2.
2:43:58 Main Motion to approve the application with conditions listed on pages 2-8 of the
Planning Board Resolution and that we restore the original condition number 5 as it was
brought forward to the Planning Board before any changes were made to it at the Planning
Board.
It was moved by Cr.Kirchhoff,seconded by Cr.Jacobson to approve the aMlicatiou with
conditions listed on pages 2-8 of the Planning Board Resolution and that we restore the
original condition number 5 as it was brought forward to the Plannine Board before any
changes were made to it at the Plannine Board.
2:44:48 Amendment to the Main Motion to include language that Bridger Ski Foundation,
Bozeman Deaconess Hospital,Parks and Recreation,together with Planning Staff work out
a lease or other agreement among them for location of a warming but-type facility and
perhaps equipment shelter,and restrooms(added after stated)for multiple users.
4
LfmAed thm tes o/Me Bo_eman City Commission.Meermg,\ovember 5 2007
It was moved by Cr.Kirchhoff,seconded by Cr.Jacobson to amend the main motion to
include language that Bridger Ski Foundation,Bozeman Deaconess Hospital Parks and
Recreation,together with PIanning Staff work out a lease or other agreement among them
for location of a warming but-type facility and perhaps equipment shelter,and restrooms
(added after stated)for multiple users.
2:46:28 Discussion
2:48:17 Cr. Kirchhoff
Cr. Kirchhoff asked that his motion include "this facility should provide ample space for meeting
rooms for multiple user groups including BSF."
2:51.01 Mr.Leep
Mr. Leep asked that the Commission table this issue to a further time.
2:56:14 Vote to Approve the Amendment to the Main Motion to include language that
Bridger Ski Foundation,Bozeman Deaconess Hospital,Parks and Recreation,together
with Planning Staff work out a lease or other agreement among them for location of a
warming but-type facility and perhaps equipment shelter,and restrooms(added after
stated)for multiple users and this facility should provide ample space for meeting rooms
for multiple user groups including BSF(added after original motion was stated).
Those voting Ave being Crs.Kirchhoff,Jacobson,Becker,Rupptand Mayor Krauss.
Those voting No being none.
The motion carried 5-0.
2:57:11 Amendment to the Main Motion that the applicant works with the Planning Staff
to designate an overflow parking area for the Highland Green Park,perhaps on the south
side of Painted Hills Road or another suitable location.
It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff, seconded by Cr.Jacobson to approve an amendment that
the applicant working with the Planning Staff to designate an overflow aarkine area for the
Highland Green Park,perhaps on the south side of Painted Hills Road or another suitable
location.
2:57:33 Vote to Approve the Amendment to the Main Motion that the applicant working
with Planning Staff designate an overflow parking area for the Highland Green Park,
perhaps on the south side of Painted Hills Road or another suitable location.
Those voting Ave being Crs.Kirchhoff,Jacobson,Becker,Rupp,and Mayor Krauss.
5
Lipped khmaes q the Romnan Cjr (ommrssion UeermQ, NolenlbEr 5,2007
Those votine No beine none.
The motion carried 5-0,
2:57:46 Amendment to the Main Motion,addressing the issue of double-fronting lots that
are depicted on The Knolls Highland South Master Plan, that these double-fronted lots be
replaced with lots that provide for frontage on the arterial of Kagy,and that the language
to impose this condition be lifted and altered suitably from the Aspen Park Subdivision
that was approved recently.
It was moved by Cr. Kirchhoff,seconded by Cr. Jacobson to approve an amendment to the
main motion,addressine the issue of double-frontine lots that are depicted on The Knolls
Highland South Master Plan,that these double-fronted lots be renlaced with lots that
provide for frontage on the arterial of Kagy,and that the language to impose this condition
be lifted then altered suitably from the Aspen Park Subdivision that was approved
recently.
2:58.38 Mr. Epple
Mr.Epple stated that he does not think that there is a condition for Aspen Park relating to
double-fronted lots,but that it is his understanding that Cr. Kirchhoff would like the lots to be
revised like Aspen Park's double fronted lots that are shown in the revised plan,
2:59:00 Discussion
2:59:03 Vote to Approve the Amendment to the Main Motion,addressing the issue of
double-fronting lots that are depicted on The Knolls Highland South Master Plan, that
these double-fronted lots be replaced with lots that provide for frontage on the arterial of
Kagy, and that the language to impose this condition be lifted and altered suitably from the
Aspen Park Subdivision that was approved recently.
Those voting Ave being Crs. Kirchhoff,Jacobson,Becker,and Rupp
Those voting No beine Mayor Krauss.
The motion carried 4-1.
2:59:19 Amendment to the Main Motion that the applicant be required to have a dust
mitigation plan developed.
It was moved by Cr.Rupp,seconded by Cr.Kirchhoff to approve the amendment to the
main motion that the applicant be required to have a dust mitigation plan developed.
2:59:32 Discussion
6
arked 41inurer nJ 1he Bozeman(m C omnrrstrmr Werrrnb..Novemher 3.200-
2:59:34 Vote to Approve the Amendment to the Main Motion that the applicant be
required to have a dust mitigation plan developed.
Those voting Ave being Crs-Rupp,Kirchhoff,and Jacobson.
Those voting No being Crs.Becker and Mayor Krauss.
The motion carried 3-2.
2:59:46 Amendment to the Main Motion that the affordable lots be developed
proportionally in all future phases.
It was moved by Cr.Rupp,seconded by Cr. Kirchhoff to approve the amendment to the
main motion that the affordable lots be developed proportionally in all future phases.
3:00:27 Discussion
3:00:29 Vote to Approve the Amendment to the Main Motion that the affordable lots be
developed proportionally in all future phases.
Those voting Ave beine Crs.Rupp,Kirchhoff,Jacobson,and Mayor Krauss.
Those voting No being Cr.Becker.
The motion carried 4-1.
3:00.43 Amendment to the Main Motion that under condition#19 that it be changed to
clearly read that there is one Homeowners Association and not a Sub Homeowners
Association for the affordable units,
It was moved by Cr.Rupp,seconded by Cr.Kirchhoff to approve the Amendment to the
main motion that under condition#19,that it be chanced to clearly read that there is one
Homeowners Association and not a Sub Homeowners Association for the affordable units.
3:01:01 Discussion
3:01:58 Vote on the Amendment to the Main Motion that under condition#19,be changed
to clearly read that there is one Homeowners Association and not a Sub Homeowners
Association for the affordable units.
Those voting Ave beine Crs.Runt),Kirchhoff,Jacobson,Becker,and Mayor Krauss.
Those votine No beine none.
The motion carried 5-0.
7
Linked A1ini(tes o1 The fto-enum(ln•(tannic un Afeehng. �orenrber S.201),'
3:02:38 Amendment to the Main Motion to waive the requirement to build out the
entire length of Kagy,between Bozeman Trail and Highland,only the section adjacent to
phase 1 to Highland.
It was moved by Cr.Becker,seconded by Cr.Rupp to approve the amendment to the main
motion to waive the requirement to build out the entire length of Kagy, between Bozeman
Trail and Highland,only the section adjacent to phase 1 to Highland.
3:03:07 Discussion
3:03:10 Vote on the Amendment to the Main Motion, to waive the requirement to build out
the entire length of Kagy,between Bozeman Trail and Highland,only the section adjacent
to phase 1 to Highland.
Those voting Ave being Crs.Becker,Jacobson,and Mayor Krauss.
Those voting No being Crs.Rupp,and Kirchhoff.
The motion carried 3-2.
3.03:28 Vote on the Main Motion to approve the application with conditions listed on pages
2-8 of the Planning Board Resolution and that we restore the original condition number 5
as it was brought forward to the Planning Board before any changes were made to it at the
Planning Board.
It was moved by Cr.Rupp, seconded by Cr.Becker to lay this motion on the table.
Those voting Ave being Crs, Rupp,Becker,Kirchhoff,Jacobson,and Mayor Krauss.
Those voting No being none.
The motion carried 5-0.
:03:57 Break
3:21:08 2, est Babcock Elementary School Informal#I-07025(Knight)
3:21:12 Mr. Epple
Mr.Epple gave a presentation reg the West Babcock Elementary School Informal
application.The Commission gave their i regarding the project,
3:39:50 Public Comment
Mayor Krauss opened public comment.
No person commented.
8
\C
k v,
THE KNOLLS j,•'` -
E AT NLL-REvT I ( 7 —
1
i
L� �lrItj�'
� r l Lr
l-' I /
r1
LEGEND
cj)
DEDICATED PARK(1 1 25-AG)
_ DEDICATED LINEAR PARK(1•1.665-AG)
IMPROVED OPEN SPACE(10.-100-AG) F �r�
NATURAL OPEN 5PACE(50.520-AG) �';r- / \ \(hL
r 5IN&LE FAMILY LOT T�_ ' • �[wv _ +L
ATTACHED S NISLE FAMILY L_ �'�= ( • Of { 'LOT � f r r r<
- - DETACHED AFFORDABLE tUlL
ATTACHED AFFORDABLE HOUSING LOiAFFORDABLE MOUSx't6 aHAM-FAMILY LOTF—Ell
u MWED-USE LOT
WETLAND 5ET5ACK
THE KNOLLS EAST & HIGHLAND SOUTH
Bozeman Deaconess CONCC•PTI/AL MASTER P1AN u ZA
goo
xal:ns.rk., &crmmn,AIT
October 6,2008
Bozeman City Commission
e/o: Mr. Andy Epple, Director
Mr. Doug Riley, Senior Planner
City of Bozeman Department of Planning
20 East Olive
Bozeman,MT 59715
Re: Knolls East/Highland South Subdivision Application
Commission, Mr. Epple, and Mr. Riley:
Please accept this letter and attached documentation as our formal request, on behalf of
Potter Clinton Development and Bozeman Deaconess Health Services, to have the Knolls
East/Highlands South major subdivision application placed on the City of Bozeman
Commission public hearing agenda.
As you may recall,we did request that this application be put on hold near the conclusion
of the initial public hearing held late last year. We requested this due to the motion that
was being considered by the Commission at that hearing. The tabled motion is fairly
lengthy and we did need time to make certain we understood what was included in the
motion. In addition, there was work needing to be done regarding the Bridger Ski
Foundation and its role in the main park facilities. Also, as time has elapsed, the Iocal
real estate market has been going through a correction, especially with relation to
building lots, and that on-going situation has caused our organizations to pause with
respect to moving forward on large scale projects. Given all of the above dynamics, we
have reached the conclusion that it is appropriate to reach a conclusion on this
application. The project is truly exciting and we believe represents a high quality
addition to the City, in terms of attractive housing opportunities and park facilities.
Incorporated into this letter is an accurate transcription of the tabled motion and our
detailed responses to each of the motions individual details, as well as several pertinent
illustrations.
3985 Valley Commons Drive
Bozeman,MT 59718
(406)586-9922 • FAX(406)586-9921
Background and Summary of Tabled Motion
The initial motion (made by Mr. Kirchoff) was to approve the application with the
conditions as listed in the planning board resolution. Mr. Kirchoff also wanted condition
5 to be restored to its original text, rather than a modified version that came out of the
planning board. Condition 5 deals with public access in the park areas, some of which
are dedicated and some of which are not. Given that much of the park and open spaces
have steeper slopes and sensitive wetland areas we are concerned that abuse and unsafe
behavior by the public will take place on property that is not owned by the City.
Generally we have concerns about liability for the future Home Owners Association who
will own some of the park/open space areas. For this reason we suggested that the non-
dedicated areas not be open to the public. This was accepted by the Planning Board, but
Mr. Kirchoff moved that public access be allowed in all park/open space areas. Our
concerns can be addressed by adding statements to the plat that specify what can be done
in the non-dedicated open space areas and allows for pedestrian signage in the main
dedicated park areas. Following is the exact motion and our response and suggested plat
text:
Mr. Kirchoff. "I move that we approve the application with the conditions as
listed on pages 2-8 of the planning board resolution and that we restore the
original condition #5 as it was brought forward to the planning board before any
changes were made to it at the planning board."
Applicant Response: O.K.with restoring the original condition#5
as long as the following note can be placed on the face of the plat:
"All areas labeled as Public Open Space do allow for public
access.Acceptable activities in these areas include walking,hiking,
running,bicycling, and picnicking. Bicycle activities are restricted
to the designated trails. Organized picnicking may take place only
in designated areas. All wetlands and associated vegetation within
the boundaries of the Open Space are protected by the Federal
Government and shall not be damaged or destroyed."
Applicant also proposes the following condition: "During final
park plan review for the Highland Green Park,signage within the
Nature Preserve corridor shall also be addressed that states the
acceptable activities"
Mr. Kirchoff also went on to make three amendments to the original motion. The first
was that language be added that would require a Bridger Ski Foundation facility be
located in the development. The commission discussed the amendment for some time
and clarified that it was the intent that the facility be for Bridger Ski Foundation and that
it must be in, or next to the park. We are in agreement that it would be appropriate for
BSF to have a facility in the Highland Glen Park. We have met with BSF, and the park
department and the planning department and have formulated a plan whereby BSF will
i
be deeded a lot next to the park. A diagrammatic illustration is attached to the submittal
materials. The exact size and Iocation will be determined at the time of Park Plan review
with the first phase. We do request that this not be made a condition of final plat
approval, as the City cannot require a private party to donate land to another private party
as a condition of plat approval. We believe BSF is comfortable with the commitment we
have made to them, based on the longstanding relationship between Bozeman Deaconess
and the Bridger Ski Foundation.Following is the exact motion and our response:
Mr. Kirchoff Amendment#1: to include language that bsf and bdh and parks and
rec, together with planning staff work out a lease or other agreement among them
for location of a warming but type facility and perhaps equipment shelter for
multiple users.
Commission Discussion: want to make sure it is for BSF, has
restrooms, and is located in,or next to the park.
Applicant Response: Applicant has met with the planning
department, Bridger Ski Foundation, and Parks and Recreation
department. We have submitted a conceptual drawing showing the
location of a 0.86 acre lot located adjacent to the Highland Green
Park. A lot such as this will be deeded over to Bridger Ski
Foundation after the final plat is filed. A deed restriction that
grants the lot back to the City in the event that BSF no longer owns
the lot will also be recorded with the Final Plat. We request and
recommend that these actions not be made a condition of approval
as it is beyond the scope of the application.
Mr. Kirchoff s second amendment was for a larger parking area for the Highland Green
Park, possibly located south of Painted Hills Road. I have attached a diagram that
illustrates that there are several hundred parking spaces available on street, adjacent to the
park. The City regulations specifically require street frontage around the park so that
parking can be accessed there. We do not believe that additional parking is necessary,
nor that it can be required as we do have the necessary on-street parking and
supplemental off-street parking in the proposed plan. The area that Mr. Kirchoff
suggested for additional parking is a sensitive area that we have worked closely with the
adjoining neighborhoods to keep as unimproved open space. Following is the exact
motion and our response:
Kirchoff Amendment#2: I move that the applicant working with planning staff
designate an overflow parking area for the highland green park, perhaps on the
south side of Painted Hills Road or another suitable location.
Applicant Response: The Highland Green Park does have 2100' of
public street frontage where parking is allowed. This frontage will
allow for 85 cars to park immediately adjacent to the park.
Including the on-site parking of approximately 30 spaces, there
will be 115 spaces of parking immediately adjacent to the park.
Additional parking is also possible on Painted Hills Road to the
west and south of the Highland Green Park where an additional
5226 feet of street exists that is not directly in front of a home or
driveway. Combined,there are 332 parking spots available for
park users that will not effect private homes or driveways. We do
not feel that additional parking is required and placing it south of
Painted Hills Road, in the open space,is contrary to the applicants'
desires for that space as well as the neighboring land owners'
expectations for that space.
Mr. Kirchoff's third amendment was to require us to re-design the lots along Kagy
boulevard so that they have actual frontage on Kagy. We find no stipulation in the design
regulations that would require us to perform this redesign. We do not agree that lots
fronting on Kagy are better than what we have designed and proposed. The planning
department has recommended several conditions that will require attractive architecture
facing Kagy Boulevard and will work well with what we have proposed. We are
comfortable with their recommendations and have seen this plan work very well in other
developments. We have recommended an additional requirement (see attached figure)
for these lots in the submittal materials which would require standard, screened out door
storage areas. Following is the exact motion and our response.
Kirchoff Amendment #3: "To address the issue of double fronting lots that are
depicted on the Knolls HS master plan, that these double frontage lots be replaced
with lots that provide for frontage on the arterial of Kagy and that the language to
impose this condition be lifted and altered suitably from the Aspen Park
subdivision."
Commission Discussion: Jacobsen: Doesn't this happen on
Highland? Kirchoff We're doing this for arterials at the
moment... Epple:There was no condition for this we think you
mean to revise the plan ala Aspen Park?Kirchoff. Yes.
Applicant Response: We do not,nor does the UDO, consider these
lots to be double frontage lots as they do have a 50' open space
strip between the lots and Kagy. We fail to see where our proposal
does not meet the requirement of the UDO and are hesitant to
make the requested adjustment because we do not see any benefit
to the suggested re-design. We do believe the design details that
staff has suggested are appropriate for these lots and would suggest
an additional requirement that these lots all have a designated area
for placement of outdoor storage. We have attached an exhibit
showing how this could be accomplished on these lots. We request
that this amendment be reconsidered and that the outdoor storage
area requirements be added as a condition
Commissioner Rupp then also made 3 amendments to the motion. The first was for a
dust mitigation plan, which we will prepare. The second and third amendments had to do
with the affordable housing in the development. The City of Bozeman did adopt an
affordable housing plan that is specific and unique to this property. Bozeman Deaconess
Health Services is committed to enacting the plan as approved. The plan includes
stipulations for BDHS to plat certain numbers of lots for attached housing, detached
housing and rental housing. BDHS then must sell those lots for certain prices, based on
the median area income for the year that the lots are platted. There are also deed
restrictions that must be placed on the lot that requires that only qualified owners may
reside in the homes. In addition, the City has the ability to buy the lots and build the
affordable homes if they sit vacant for a period of time. All of these details are
achievable and it will result in affordable housing being built in the development. Please
refer to the full plan for more information.
Mr. Rupp's second amendment would require that the affordable housing units be built in
the first phase before additional phases are allowed. We believe this goes beyond the
approved plan and would in effect force BDHS to build the homes. This was never
BDHS's intention when they proposed the plan. In the past, it was the cost of the land
that kept builders from being able to provide truly affordable housing in Bozeman. This
is why BDHS proposed that the land cost be controlled and tied to area incomes. This
should allow area builders to produce a modest sized home in the correct price range,
dependant on which income bracket they are building for. We believe the stipulation in
the plan which allows for the City to buy the lots provides for the guarantee that the lots
will not sit unused. Following is the exact motion and our response.
Rupp Amendment #2: I move that the affordable lots be developed
apportionately.
Discussion:Kirchgf�j`.� What do you mean? Rupp:I mean that they
cannot move onto second phase until homes are built in the first
phase.
Applicant Response: The Commission adopted an affordable
housing plan for this Subarea, and that plan does not dictate that
the homes must be built. The plan calls for BDHS to plat the lots
and offer them for sale at a controlled price and to also deed
restrict the property so that only people that qualify may own the
homes, among other details. The subdivision application proposes
exactly what is called for in the approved plan. BDHS does not
intend to construct homes, outside of the age restricted portion,and
to require them to build homes is outside of the purview of the City
Commission, is beyond the scope of the application, and is
contrary to what the approved affordable housing plan calls for
BDHS to do. We do note that the plan does allow for the City to
purchase the affordable lots and construct homes on them in the
event that no free market builders undertake the task within 1 year
of the lots being platted. We believe that this existing stipulation
addresses Comissioner Rupp's concerns that the affordable homes
will not be built by giving the City the ability to take ownership of
the lots and have the homes built.
Mr. Rupp's third amendment had to do with condition 19 and the future Owner's
Association. We believe his concerns in this regard are addressed by the existing
condition 19. There will be no discrimination within the Owners Association toward the
affordable housing lots. The affordable housing lots will be part of the Association and
will have all of the rights and authority of any other lot owner in the Association.
However, like many other properties in the development, they will need to also be a part
of their own Association. Due to the many different property types in the development it
is necessary to create what is referred to as "sub" associations. These smaller
associations, of which there will be several, deal with issues that are unique to the
different property types. For instance, on the affordable lots, there will be different
design guidelines, building setbacks, and overall home requirements as well as property
configurations that are unique to those lots. There will also be unique maintenance
situations that their"sub" association will need to manage, such as shared driveways, or
shared yard areas in some instances. This is also the case with other property types such
as townhomes, condos, or apartments, or the age restricted communities. The term"sub"
is intended to signify that it is an independent neighborhood association subordinate to
and with responsibility to the umbrella, or master association. We believe condition 19,
as written, does address Mr. Rupp's concerns as again there will not be any
discrimination towards the affordable housing lots. Mr. Rupp acknowledged in his
motion that condition 19 might be fine. We request that with this clarification and our
written commitment, that the existing condition 19 be left intact, as requiring us to not
have "sub" associations will make the administration of the development much more
difficult and burdensome for the future residents. Following is the exact motion and our
response.
Rupp amendment#3: I would move that under condition 19 it be changed
to read that there is one homeowners association and not a "sub"
association for the affordable units. 19 might be fine I just want to add
some emphasis to that. Just clearly want to state that there is just one
owners association.
Applicant Response: Again, the Commission adopted an
affordable housing policy that specifically requires that the
affordable lots be part of a sub-association. This may simply be a
misunderstanding of the terminology used in Owners Associations. j
Even though there will be several "sub" associations, the
individual owners will still all be members of the same Owners
Association. For instance, all of the lots in the age restricted
portions are part of a "sub" association. All of the townhome lots
will be part of a"sub"association as well. Yet they still will all be
equal members in the larger Association. The sub associations are
formed based on the unique maintenance needs for each housing
type as well as architectural control for each housing type. For
instance, if there are common areas within the boundaries of a
townhome development that owners of only those buildings have
access to or maintenance responsibilities(such as a shared
driveway), then just those owners need to be assessed for those
i
costs, not all members of the Master Association. It is for these
reasons that we feel condition 19 as drafted will suffice, because
the affordable lots will be part of the larger Master Association,
just as every other lot type and lot owner in the development.
Finally, Mr. Becker made an amendment to the motion concerning the construction of
Kagy Boulevard. He moved that the requirement to build out the entire length of Kagy
with the first phase of development be waived and that the western portion, from
Highland Boulevard to the end of Phase 1, be built with Phase 1. We are in agreement
with ti this motion. During the hearing we requested this due to the fact that the vast
majority of our traffic, especially from Phase 1, will be traveling west on Kagy, not east.
It is imperative, especially in the new market conditions, that this project not be required
to mitigate any more than its true impact. Requiring the project to build out the entire
length of Kagy with the first phase will keep this project from happening as the financial
impact of that decision is immense. In our opinion this requirement is not well founded as
you would be requiring us to mitigate future impacts, now. The eastern portion will be
and should be built with the eastern phases as that is when the traffic will impact that
portion of the road and mitigation can legally be required. Following is the exact motion
and our response.
Becker Amendment: I move to waive the requirement to build out the entire
length of Kagy between Bozeman Trail and Highland. Only the section adjacent
to Phase 1 to Highland.
Applicant Response: We are in agreement with this motion as we
believe the City should require mitigation for impacts when the
impacts exist,not beforehand.
City engineering staff has opined that you should require the full build out now because
they have required this of other developments in the City. They also opined that you
should require this because if we are allowed to build it in stages then the road will have
to be closed for construction more than one time. These are arguments of a by-gone era
when development could, and in some cases did, mitigate almost any requested item
regardless of its true impact. This was due to the pace of construction and upward price
pressures. Those market conditions do not exist now. We do not believe that the
development pace of the recent past (with respect to building lots) will return, although
more moderate growth and construction will continue. This is mainly due to inventory
levels and downward pricing pressures. We do not suggest that you should not require us
to build the eastern portion of the road because of market conditions, but it something
that the Commission, as elected decision makers, should be fully aware of.
In our opinion, City Commissions should make decisions based on the unique
circumstances for each situation. While I can and have pointed out instances where the
requirement has been waived (Harper Pucket Road), it does miss the point. The point is
that in this case, there is no impact from the first phase of our development to the eastern
portion of Kagy Boulevard. We have documented this in our accepted traffic study and
we request that the City Commission recognize and acknowledge this. We are not
requesting that you waive the requirement to mitigate a documented impact. We are
requesting that you waive the requirement to mitigate impacts that do not exist.
As you can see, the tabled motion had many moving parts and we feel that our response
is reasonable and we ask for the City Commissions support on this very important
development proposal. While we have given our opinion above, that the market for
building lots is not stable at this point, we do believe that this development can be
successful in the future, if brought to the market in manageable increments and with
reasonable expectations from the City. We do loop forward to seeing this development
take place over the next several years and again ask for your support. Thank you.
S'ncerely
�on�L,eep l�
I
/
rr
�� POVHDA e1pK LOT "'n• }tY � / 1
-1
j IT
�« aT �J
it
Crll
PALWED HILLS ROAD ;
PARKING REQUIREMENTS: j
PRorrrAGE
'«.I.P 1{rT FR.1\TAUP
,r.i'ry..1P STReeTFRUYIAGY � '
PARKIIM.APAIT_S 1 L
tle T.ARAIf:C PAw.%,G SPA(4APR11PIDF.B 't y .#
>i SP.ACE•RFguIRPD . Y
:9YARRIM1t:SPAI'RSti11KP1.1:i ! -
REFERENCE:ItIRCHOFFAAlF.NI)MF.1VT#i
HIGHLAND GREEN PARK Pr`wedp`
SCAM=•=4�' � DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
NORTH F 1 gr BOZEMAN,MT ally,Cti1K
TRA_TJ
--� -7 65 LF-
1 SPACES
652 LF-
MINn.-.0 IIILLSIMAD 1 2-f SPACES �
IY
` v-ec 1 463 LF-
�u 60 SPACES pJ
s �
M- r 995LF-
I Ro ND n �a c �,Q�,� 4 1 SPACES \
r M1P"tom 3 SPAGE5 ��ry 4 1 SPAGE5 •\
Tt* PHASE 2
HIGHLAND GREEN \
nOLLSLANI I%9T PHASE 4 ~ \
n- Ts-wTeivv \
I �� ....e \ _ 44 SPACES 1 Ol 4 LF-
rOGReT
�v PARR■ \
MINIM 11ILLS110AD
I q Rc14n li
�-1 343 LF-
H 5 5 55 SPACES
ae, CIE, v
--HYALITE HOLLOW
plpIGATlD L1nEwR Pwcti
-_ —_——_.._____ _—____--
N ryMYA,.E�YY � •� - � _— APPR�X.MAT�— — __
R � POYIER
H=/V MYAL/7EYE/Y
R-t
Ti CJ�.
DATA:
85 HIGHLAND GREEN PARK PARALLEL PARKING SPACES
2 11 OTHER PARK$OPEN 5PACE AREA PARALLEL PARKING 5PAGE5
— — 502 TOTAL PARALLEL PARKING 5PAGE5 REFERENCE:KIRCHOFFAMFNDMF.NT#2
SCALE: 1' = 200" THE KNOLLS EAST&HIGHLAND SOUTH
o, 200� a�ol PARALLEL PARKING FRONTAGE
NORTH I I I I I BOZEMAN, MT
10' K 20'rNC.LCI`'IJRE WITH 6' FTIVACY
FENCE AMP%09ACZ%1�12
I �r e.sFw
anu fi _
__ __�.........ee'o.ct � � itn.u'� :�:e....se mr<ixT:-���w•x=y-.-.__. _,_- — _ _ __ �_.__
2J 1
KAGY BCULEVARD FRONTAGE
opt �r_lo
I � �
1 � I
p
I
8 I
I �
REQUIRED OUTDOOR STORAGE I� 1
iI"1 NIMUM 17 X:7
I
I I
II I
I
1
REQUIRED OUTDOOR 5T
® MINIMUM 10 X 10' I I
"CEY SOVLEVARD FRONTAGE--—�
ww ,uu rz10'
THE KNOLLS EAST & HIGHLAND SOUTH
]twemin Deaconess TYPICAL KAGY BLVD.FRONTAGE!PLAN 6L SECTION
Iie.6hwmen QIIZCIIIaII,,� .M,".,.�v
REFERENCE:AIRCHOFFAMENDMENT#3