Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10-02-07 Planning Board Minutes.doc*** MINUTES *** CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, OCTOBER 2, 2007 7:30 P.M. ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chair JP Pomnichowski called the regular meeting of the City Planning Board to order at 7:30 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance. Members Present: JP Pomnichowski, Chair Erik Henyon Caren Roberty Randy Carpenter Ed Sypinski Brian Caldwell Eric Roset Kaaren Jacobson Bill Quinn Members Absent: None Staff Present: Brian Krueger, Associate Planner Andy Epple, Planning Director Shoni Dykstra, Planning Secretary Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary Guests Present: Chris Mehl Ron Slade Chris Budeski Neal Ainsworth ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (0-15 MINUTES) {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Planning Board and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} Seeing there were no members of the public wishing to give any comment, Chair JP Pomnichowski closed this portion of the meeting. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 5, 2007 Seeing there were no corrections, changes or additions to the minutes, Chair JP Pomnichowski announced that the minutes of the regular meeting of September 5, 2007, are approved as submitted. ITEM 4. INFORMAL REVIEW Informal Application #I-07022 (Cowdrey Towers) - An Informal Application for advice and comment, on behalf of the owner, Tracy Cowdrey, and the representatives, Bechtle-Slade, PC, on the proposed construction of nine seven-story mixed-use buildings and related site improvements. The property is legally described as Lots 3-6 of the Saccoccia Minor Subdivision. (Krueger) Staff Report: Associate Planner Brian Krueger characterized this application as a complex one that does not fit into the code as it exists today. As a result, staff has discussed the possibilities of growth policy revisions, involvement in the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan update process, and various zoning designations. He noted that those issues, along with four questions on which staff is seeking guidance, have been submitted in the memo included in the Board members’ packets. Associate Planner Krueger noted the subject property lies just east of Lowe’s. The 16-acre parcel consists of four lots within a minor subdivision that is overlaid by the Lowe’s PUD as well as the Saccoccia PUD. The property has a land use designation of regional commercial and is zoned “B-2”. Because it is located in close proximity to North 19th Avenue and I-90, the area has been envisioned as accommodating larger regional scale retail, educational facilities and medical facilities. He indicated there is a small wetlands area in the corner of the subject property. The Associate Planner noted this proposal is conceptual and general. The proposal is for about 1 million square feet of space, constructed in nine seven-story buildings. The original application included a mix of uses as follows: 88 percent residential, 2 percent office, 6 percent retail and 2 percent restaurant. The “B-2” zone, however, does not contemplate residential development; and staff has not previously seen this type of development proposed within that zone. He noted the plan includes a retention pond and intensely tall buildings, potentially up to 96 feet in height. He stated that this parcel contains a significant amount of common open space for the planned unit development, and this proposal substantially reduces that amount of open space. The Associate Planner stated that the Development Review Committee and the Design Review Board have reviewed this conceptual plan and, as a result of comments from those boards, the applicant has revised the plan. Those changes include a reallocation of space and the construction of a parking garage rather than the common parking area under most of the buildings. Associate Planner Krueger stated the Design Review Board was generally in favor of the conceptual plan, although its discussion was limited to the architecture. He noted that the Development Review Committee’s comments are included in the staff report, and generally revolve around setbacks and whether this is appropriate in the “B-2” zone. He indicated that the Planning Board comments will be combined with the comments from those bodies and included in the information forwarded to the City Commission for consideration at its October 15 meeting. The Associate Planner asked the Board to enter into a general discussion and posed the following four questions: (1) would you support this type, mix and intensity of uses on this site in the entryway corridor and in this area of the city; (2) would you support the potential maximum height of 96 feet for this site; (3) does the proposal appear to be an overall benefit to the city as a whole; and (4) does the proposed development appear to be in accordance with the principles of the growth policy, particularly Chapter 6? Planner Krueger noted that the tallest downtown buildings are 78 to 80 feet in height; and under the unified development ordinance, the proposed 96-foot tall buildings are possible. He then indicated that through the new urban mixed use zoning designation, this proposed type of development could be done. Questions for Staff: Responding to Chair JP Pomnichowski, the Planner stated that when the Lowe’s and Saccoccia PUDs were considered, the entire property was included even though the Saccoccia PUD was to be phased. He noted that some of the open common space requirements for the Lowe’s site were moved to the adjacent lot, and much of the common open space designated on the parcel currently under consideration was for the entire PUD. He stated the options available to the applicant at this time include cash-in-lieu, moving the open space within the PUD, or providing the open space off-site on an adjacent parcel. He cautioned that the subject PUD now has multiple ownerships; and there are applications currently in the pipeline for development of other parcels. Responding to additional questions from Chair Pomnichowski, Planner Krueger stated the setback requirements for the Walton stream/ditch must be met and, if the applicant proposes to impact the wetlands, a revised permit may be required. He then indicated he does not anticipate another planned unit development would be overlaid on the two existing PUDs; rather, he suggested it would be more appropriate to conform to the design requirements of the urban mixed use district under the existing PUDs. He acknowledged that this could require a zone map amendment and potentially a growth policy amendment. Responding to Brian Caldwell, Planner Krueger stated the subject property lies within the I-90 entryway corridor, and confirmed that the applicant may request deviations but cautioned that they are limited to 20 percent above or below the listed standard. Ed Sypinski asked if the applicant will be able to meet parkland requirements for the residential component of the development. Associate Planner Krueger described that as a looming issue, along with meeting the requirements of the workforce housing ordinance. He noted that options include cash-in-lieu, providing those amenities off-site, or providing them on an adjacent parcel. He stated the applicant may request credit for other on-site improvements, and stressed that those requests are subject to review by the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board and approval by the City Commission. Responding to Ed Sypinski, Planner Krueger stated that this is where the discussion begins on whether the community is ready for this type of development in a regional commercial zoning district, and acknowledged that it may be discussed further during the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan update process. He noted one of the issues to consider is whether other larger commercial users have developed in this area in anticipation of more commercial uses and not encountering conflicts with residential development. Ed Sypinski noted it is important to consider potential conflicts between commercial and residential uses, particularly those pertaining to noise, traffic and lights. Brian Caldwell noted it would be interesting to see the calculation of density proposed. Kaaren Jacobson asked if Lowe’s has beeping trucks all night long, citing the northeast quadrant of the community as an example of those potential conflicts. Associate Planner Krueger noted that the applicant has responded to some of those issues by putting a parking structure along the street frontage adjacent to Lowe’s. He then recognized that this is an issue to be further considered in designing of the site. Applicant Presentation: Ron Slade, Bechtle-Slade Architects, thanked the Planning staff for being cooperative and creative during this informal review process. He stated that significant design revisions have been made in light of comments previously received from the Development Review Committee and the Design Review Board and acknowledged that, because of the scale and magnitude of this project, additional redesigns will be needed. He noted the revised plan includes a 45-percent residential component. He stated that, because of the high groundwater table, the underground parking has been eliminated and a parking structure added; and the result is to lower the height of the buildings. He noted that this allows a more pedestrian feel. He then indicated that the parking structure will help provide a buffer from Lowe’s, but he had not previously considered the potential of beeping trucks at night from the commercial development. He stated the applicant will seek the highest level of LEED certification possible for the buildings and drew attention to the green roofs proposed, noting that it is the applicant’s intent to provide a green outdoor space for every unit possible. Mr. Slade stated a significant outdoor performance venue is proposed within this mixed use live/work lifestyle center. He envisions young professionals, empty nesters and even families living in this development. He noted the first two stories of the buildings are to be pushed forward to the street edge and constructed in a very historic and traditional manner. They are to be brick, with the upper levels to be stepped back and more contemporary in design and materials. He indicated that the buildings are to be constructed with the pedestrian in mind. He concluded by voicing a willingness to respond to questions. Questions for Applicant: Responding to Kaaren Jacobson, Ron Slade stated the retail will be primarily located on the ground floor. He noted that 20 percent of the space must be retail, which is about 107,000 square feet. Randy Carpenter asked the applicant to respond to the four questions that Associate Planner Krueger has prepared. Ron Slade stated he feels high-density vertical mixed-use development is good for a number of reasons. He noted that, while the subject area is zoned for regional commercial development, he feels there is too much land zoned in that manner, and that this site will lend itself well to the proposed mixed use development. He cited Reserve Street in Missoula as a frustrating failure as an arterial street and voiced his interest in preserving Bozeman as a unique place cherished for its lifestyle. He acknowledged the economic benefit that the community reaps from regional commercial development but stated he feels a significant architecturally sound high-end lifestyle center will also enhance the area and the overall community. He voiced his frustration with the vehicular orientation of development along North 19th Avenue and stated he feels a node of this type of development within the regional commercial zone will be a welcome relief. He noted the building height is currently at 86 feet, although he acknowledged that the height might increase a little. He stated that with today’s software, it is possible to build a replica of the existing buildings and topography and add the proposed structures to see how they will impact the area and adjacent properties. He believes the project will benefit the overall city for a number of reasons, noting that it precludes some sprawl by providing 1 million square feet of development on very few acres. He noted the current zoning would allow the same level of impact in a one-level big box retail center. He concluded by stating that the urban mixed use zoning designation is designed to foster this type of project, and was developed independent of this project. Further responding to questions from Randy Carpenter, Mr. Slade stated the mix of uses under the current proposal are 45 to 50 percent residential, or approximately 230 dwelling units; 35 to 40 percent parking; and the balance in a combination of retail, commercial and office. He anticipates the retail and offices will be located on the lower levels with residential development above. He then turned his attention to the square footage breakdowns, noting 119,580 square feet will be commercial, 21,524 square feet in restaurants, 56,203 square feet in offices, and 428,128 square feet in residential. He stated that, because of the mix of uses, the applicant will seek a reduction in parking requirements, noting the proposal includes 965 spaces. He turned his attention to the residential component, noting that it includes 32 one-bedroom units, 158 two-bedroom units and 40 three-bedroom units. A penthouse level is included in the plan. He indicated that workforce housing has not yet been addressed; however, he suggested that that requirement may be met through an off-site development. He turned to the issue of open space, noting that this development will not encroach into the wetlands although it might encroach into the flexible open space. He asked that consideration be given to the urban plazas and open spaces as well as the entertainment venue and the green spaces provided on the various roof levels. Responding to Kaaren Jacobson, Mr. Slade stated that the green space on the roof will be for use by the residents, not just for the views. He noted that a lot of water will be collected from those green decks, which do a lot to keep the buildings warm in winter and cool in summer. He then expressed his pleasure in being involved in a project where LEED certifications are being sought, noting that solar farms will be included on the roofs. Public Testimony: No public comment was received. Discussion: Chair Pomnichowski asked that the four questions identified by staff be the framework for this discussion. Brian Caldwell voiced his support for a site plan with deviations under the current zoning designation. He expressed his concern about changing the zoning designation to urban mixed use, noting that unintended consequences could result. He noted that some of the architecture along North 19th Avenue looks like, and could easily be accommodate, second stories for office space. He supports the type of opportunities afforded under this conceptual plan within the community. He appreciates the redesign, which includes the parking garage, since it is a good way to shield residents from Lowe’s and vice versa and to provide an acoustic barrier. He also appreciates the intent to provide a pedestrian feel and to address the massing of buildings by stepping back the upper levels. He concluded by encouraging the applicant to proceed with a site plan and deviations for this project. Erik Henyon voiced his support for this project, stating he likes the mix and intensity. He indicated that he could support either the site plan process or changing to the urban mixed use zoning designation. He feels that the principles of the Bozeman 2020 Community Plan are achieved and that the project provides a sense of place. He finds the height acceptable in this area, since it is located adjacent to the interstate and does not restrict the viewsheds from residential development. He likes the idea of higher-density residential development in this area. Caren Roberty stated she likes the decreased percentage of residential development, noting that anything over 49 percent is too much. She feels this application includes too much development for this site; and she is very concerned with the potential of parkland and affordable housing being provided off-site. She has trouble visualizing the proposed building height and definitely does not support the potential 96-foot height. She is also concerned about the visual impacts that this development might have on the three-story senior living development to the south. Ms. Roberty questioned whether the City is ready to support this density of development, particularly with the demands it would place on infrastructure and fire services. She concluded by stating she likes the concept, with its mix of residential and commercial uses, and the buildings with the top floors set back. Randy Carpenter stated he finds a lot of positives in this application. He noted that land consumption can be reduced by going up, and this application can result in a reduction in vehicle miles of travel. He suggested that workforce housing be provided within this project, particularly since many of the nearby uses create a demand for that type of housing. He also appreciates the reduction in surface parking under the revised plan. He then turned his attention to the downsides, the first of which is impacts on the downtown. Others include the contrast of scale with neighboring uses, potential conflicts with neighboring uses, and the type of mix and intensity of development. He acknowledged that height can be effectively dealt with through design. He noted that, while the applicant is saying all of the right things about design and pedestrian scale, the City’s zone code is not form based. He stated that, conceptually, he finds there are a lot of upsides to the project, and noted that the intensity and height can be addressed by design. JP Pomnichowski encouraged the applicant to find the easiest application process. She has no problem with a residential component on this “B-2” zoned parcel; however, she is concerned about the traffic numbers for this site. She is glad that the underground parking has been eliminated and that the floodplain will be accommodated. She noted that when the urban mixed use zoning designation was proposed, it was for a specific project and a specific site; and she feels that this site will also accommodate that type of use. She noted this site has boundaries and similar uses adjacent to it, the scale seems manageable, and the use is compatible. She feels the use is logical on this site, and the I-90 corridor overlay provides good design standards. In general, she finds the concept is great, and she expects the workforce housing to be provided on site rather than elsewhere. She likes the human scale at the street level and is pleased to hear the parking structure is to be located adjacent to the street, providing a buffer between this and the adjacent commercial use. She concluded by stating she feels the conflicts between the existing commercial uses and this development can be mitigated and encouraged the applicant to proceed. Kaaren Jacobson stated she feels this is an appropriate location for the urban mixed use zoning designation, noting it promotes a sense of place and would provide for a little city within a city that is appropriate for Bozeman. She likes the plaza and pedestrian access and all of the commercial and retail space. She is also excited about the applicant’s interest in pursuing LEED certification. She noted that, regarding the building height, she has no problem with the potential 96-foot height. She concluded by stating that, while it would be good to provide the workforce housing on site, she could accept it being located off site. Bill Quinn stated he supports the proposal as described and finds it is good for the area and will help to change the character along North 19th Avenue in a positive manner. Caren Roberty noted the workforce housing ordinance is descriptive, but also gives the applicant the ability to design a plan for a specific project, and encouraged the applicant to follow that option and provide the housing on site. Chair JP Pomnichowski concluded this agenda item by thanking the applicant for the opportunity to review this plan and noted that it will be considered at the October 15 Commission meeting. ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Subdivision Pre-Application #P-07038 (Meadow Creek Subdivision Phases 3 & 4) - A Major Subdivision Pre-Application on behalf of the owners, Canvasback, LLC, and the representatives, Madison Engineering, LLC, to allow the subdivision of 61.27 acres into 144 lots for single-household development and 3 lots for multi-household development. The property is legally described as E ½, NE ¼, NW ¼, Section 23, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Krueger) Staff Report: Associate Planner Brian Krueger noted that this pre-application is for subdivision of 61.27 acres into a total of 147 lots, 144 of which are to be detached single-household lots and 3 of which are to be multi-household lots. The subject parcel is Phases 3 and 4 of Meadow Creek Subdivision, and is located west of Genesis Business Park, south of Stucky Road and north of the extension of Graf Street; and the southeast corner of this property touches the northwest corner of Phases 1 and 2. He noted that the property has been preliminarily approved for annexation and a combination of “R-3” and “R-4” zoning designations. He noted that, while a lot of stream corridors were located in the first two phases, those issues do not exist on this property. Planner Krueger stated the applicant is proposing a modified alignment for South 27th Avenue to avoid the existing household that is not a part of this subdivision; and staff is generally supportive of that alignment as long as it meets engineering needs. He acknowledged that this change in alignment can act as a traffic calming device, although it does cause a few problems with some of the subdivision design. He indicated that Phases 1 and 2 have a significant park area at the north end, and a small expansion of that area has been included as part of the parkland proposal for this application. The Associate Planner stated a laundry list of staff concerns has been included in the memo to the Board, a few of which he highlighted. Those include the need for an additional east/west connection, the need for larger multi-family lots to accommodate the minimum density for the “R-4” zoning designation, an additional mix of uses in the “R-3” zone, additional diversity in housing types, and the lack of restricted size lots and workforce housing. He noted that some alleyways are proposed; and staff recommends that alleys be provided throughout the center area of the subdivision to better accommodate separation of utilities. He also noted that where alleys are provided, staff recommends access be provided from them. The Planner stated that, even with the park area proposed within these phases, the applicant is short of parkland for the development and will be asking the Commission for credit for the waterways and corridors in Phases 1 and 2. Also, the applicant is not proposing a neighborhood center within these phases but is asking that the Miller Park in the middle of Phases 1 and 2 be accepted for these phases as well. He noted that a fairly significant commercial node is anticipated across the street. Associate Planner Krueger noted that the bend in South 27th Avenue results in a conflict with the lot layout, and staff has recommended the alley right-of-way adjacent to the street be eliminated. He indicated that a median has been proposed at the south end, as an extension of the median for the ditch further to the south, and staff has recommended that median be eliminated. The Associate Planner stated the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board has reviewed this pre-application but is withholding comment until more information is available. He noted the Board is generally supportive of considering the proposal since there are significant and different parks available in Phases 1 and 2, providing different opportunities for recreation. He stated an e-mail from the Gallatin Valley Land Trust raises concerns about a trail connection to the sliver of park proposed at the south end of these phases, ensuring connectivity throughout the subdivision. Questions for Staff: Erik Henyon requested that, when considering subsequent phases of a subdivision in the future, the Planning Board members be given copies of previous phases; Associate Planner Krueger responded that staff will request that information from the applicant in the future. Responding to questions from Erik Henyon, Associate Planner Krueger stated staff is working on how to implement the new workforce housing ordinance and coordinate it with the requirement for restricted size lots. He noted the workforce housing ordinance is very flexible and allows the applicant to propose a plan for meeting this ordinance. Responding to questions from Ed Sypinski, the Associate Planner stated that Stucky Road and Graf Street are the primary east/west roads in this area, and suggested that another east/west road just north of the Bennett house would provide better connectivity. Responding to Kaaren Jacobson, the Associate Planner confirmed that the small park area with these phases will connect to the existing park in Phases 1 and 2 that is currently being developed. Responding to Caren Roberty, Associate Planner Krueger stated the density requirement for the “R-3” zone is met by the applicant’s proposal; it just doesn’t include the mix of housing types that is anticipated under this zoning designation. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Neal Ainsworth, applicant, noted a tremendous amount of open space, trails and ponds have been included in Phases 1 and 2 and noted that during consideration of those phases, he asked that he be given credit for those amenities as future phases are developed. He stated that Phases 1 and 2 contain 202 acres while these phases contain just over 61 acres. He indicated that the park in Phases 1 and 2 has two active soccer fields and those phases will have the community center. He assured the Board that the walking trails in Phases 1 and 2 will tie to trails in Phases 3 and 4. He also noted that workforce housing will be provided on site, although he recognizes the challenges of constructing lower priced housing on the south side of town. Mr. Ainsworth stated that his consultants have addressed many of the comments received to date. He noted, however, that alleys pose some difficulties in the layout of the center portion of these phases. He concluded by stating it is their intent to work with Capstone in developing the multi-family lots on the northern portion of the site, similar to their development in Cattail Creek Subdivision, and indicated the target price point for those units will be $200,000 to $220,000. Chris Budeski, Madison Engineering, stated they are considering making larger blocks on the north end of the site. He noted that they are also looking at converting some of the “R-3” zoned property on the south end into duplex to four-plex lots, leaving the core area as single-family residential. He expressed concern with the proposed requirement for alleys, noting that on one hand affordable housing is desired but on the other hand additional land is being required for alleys. He questioned whether alleys are really important, citing areas of the community without alleys that work well. He understands the desire to separate public and private utilities, but cautioned that putting in alleys will result in shallow lots. Mr. Budeski noted that the neighborhood center in Phase 1 contains about 8 acres. He then acknowledged that the median on the south end of these phases is not needed because the ditch terminates before it reaches the property line; it was included to reflect the road design in Phases 1 and 2. He assured the Board that trail connections will be provided for connectivity to the water corridors and trails in Phases 1 and 2. He then asked that the wetlands be counted toward the parkland requirements for these phases and indicated that additional amenities are being planned for that area. Mr. Budeski indicated the applicant is working with the Bennetts, who own the adjacent property. He assured the Board that the bend in South 27th Avenue to avoid their home and outbuildings will be constructed to meet engineering standards. He noted that he is also working with the Middle Creek Ditch Company to ensure that water is not cut off to any water user. Questions for Applicant: Responding to Brian Caldwell, Chris Budeski stated that since a commercial node is planned at the intersection of Kagy Boulevard and South 19th Avenue, only residential development is planned within this subdivision. Responding to Caren Roberty, Mr. Budeski stated that a mix of 30 percent single-family and 70 percent multi-family housing is anticipated in the affordable housing component of this development, as anticipated under the ordinance. He indicated the multi-family units will be located in the “R-4” zoned area, and the single-family units will possibly be constructed in a duplex townhouse format on a zero lot line to create a larger appearance that better fits into the neighborhood. Responding to Eric Roset, Chris Budeski estimated that a total of seven lots will be lost with an additional east/west connection. Responding to Kaaren Jacobson, Chris Budeski confirmed some of the lots along South 27th Avenue, where it bends around the Bennett property, will be double front lots. He indicated that the lots will actually front on South 28th Avenue, but the houses will be architecturally designed so they essentially have two fronts. He then stated the alley has been eliminated and four large lots provided. Responding to Randy Carpenter, Mr. Budeski stated these two phases fall within the radius from Miller Park, so a neighborhood center is not required within these phases. Responding to questions from JP Pomnichowski, Mr. Budeski stated the alley bulb on the south remains because direct access from South 27th Avenue is not allowed. He then indicated the Middle Creek Ditch Company maintains the ditch that runs from the south; and that ditch splits just south of this property. He indicated that the ditch to the Bennett property will be located within the median of South 27th Avenue; and that ditch will be eliminated when the Bennett property is developed. He noted that steps will be taken to ensure that downstream users on both ditches are not impacted by this development. Further responding to JP Pomnichowski, Mr. Budeski stated that the water rights in Middle Creek and the on-site wells will be changed at the appropriate time; however, at this time, those rights remain in agricultural use. Further responding to JP Pomnichowski, Mr. Budeski stated that another firm is doing the floodplain delineation, and the preliminary plat will not include any encroachment of lots into those areas. Public Testimony: No public comment was received. Discussion: Erik Henyon noted he is willing to accept the loss of alleyways; and all of the other issues he had have been addressed in this presentation. Brian Caldwell suggested that, rather than a 60-foot right-of-way for the streets, consideration be given to the possibility of a 45-foot right-of-way for local streets and a 20-foot right-of-way for the alleys, which would reduce the additional amount of land required to provide alleys. He then proposed that the Bennett property be viewed as a potential site for a small neighborhood commercial development or a public building, such as a church. He concluded by encouraging the applicant give further consideration to providing alleys in this subdivision. Erik Henyon stated he feels it is alright for different sections of town to have different character. He then noted he does not recall if Phases 1 and 2 of this subdivision were designed with alleys, but suggested that Meadow Creek Subdivision be developed as a complete subdivision. Eric Roset noted that, as a homebuilder, he recognizes the immense cost of providing alleys and the attendant increased costs of those homes. He acknowledged that alleys do have a place, but he does not find that they are needed in this subdivision. Caren Roberty voiced concern that if the east/west alleyways are eliminated, the blocks will be more than 400 feet in length. Randy Carpenter stated he strongly supports alleyways for a number of reasons. He noted that alleys allow houses to be located closer to the street, and those areas with alleyways tend to be more valuable. He concluded by stating that he would like to see more alleys than there are at this time. JP Pomnichowski stated that, generally, she likes this plan, but indicated it would be helpful to see the phases under consideration in context with the other phases. She noted it is the Board’s duty to ensure that each phase complies with the code, and this plan does not include enough parkland or a neighborhood center. She encouraged the applicant to show how all requirements are met for each phase. She then indicated she does not like alley bulbs and is glad to see the northern one has been eliminated. She finds that in some instances alleys are appropriate and, in context of this project, she feels the layout is acceptable. She finds that South 27th Avenue will be a nice parkway with its bend and median. She acknowledged that, while the Bennett property might be a nice neighborhood center, the applicant cannot plan property that he does not own. She is relieved that no crossings of the wetlands are proposed. She encouraged the applicant to ensure that all of the necessary steps are taken to address the existing wells, the ditch and bridges. She voiced her appreciation for the open space, parkland and trails providing connectivity. She concluded by encouraging the applicant to massage the plat to accommodate the comments that have been received. Kaaren Jacobson stated she agrees with staff recommendations and appreciates the changes that the applicant has made. She is a strong proponent of alleys, and agrees that good trail connectivity must be provided. Chair JP Pomnichowski concluded this agenda item by thanking the applicant for the opportunity to review this pre-application and noting that it will be considered by the City Commission at its October 15 meeting. 2. Bozeman 2020 Community Plan Update Chair JP Pomnichowski announced that the update process is about to begin with focus groups, citizen panels and public meetings. She noted that the Planning Board members have received a book bringing forward all of the questions to be addressed during this update process, and Clarion has been retained to assist. She noted that the citizen panels will begin on October 25, and on December 1 the first large public meeting is to be held in the meeting room at the Library. She stated that after the first of the year, more land use panels and a public meeting will be scheduled. She indicated that any questions regarding this process should be forwarded to Assistant Planning Director Chris Saunders or Associate Planner Jody Sanford. ITEM 6. NEW BUSINESS Selection of Vice Chair. Chair Pomnichowski noted that Dave Jarrett’s resignation has left this position vacant and asked that it be filled. Randy Carpenter nominated Erik Henyon to serve as Vice Chair. All Board members voted to approve the appointment of Erik Henyon as Vice Chair. Request for additional information. Randy Carpenter noted that he has previously requested additional contextual information be provided to the Planning Board members. He suggested that this could be provided electronically, and stated it would be much easier to consider an application if the surrounding land uses and developments were readily available. Chair Pomnichowski cautioned that, while that information might be helpful in providing a context for considering an application, each application must be considered by itself and on its own merits. Brian Caldwell noted it is important to take a larger view of the entire area when considering a specific application, particularly at the pre-application stage. He suggested that adding links from the Planning page of the website to the GIS information could be helpful. Randy Carpenter noted that the ovals circling specific area were extremely helpful, but asked that the comments and questions be color coded to match the circles to which they apply. ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this time, Chair JP Pomnichowski adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ JP Pomnichowski, Chair Andrew C. Epple, Director Planning Board Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman