HomeMy WebLinkAbout111808 Planning Board Minutes MINUTES
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2008
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President Pro Tem Caldwell called the regular meeting of the Planning Board to order at 7:05 p.m. in the Community Meeting Room, City Hall, 121 North Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana and
directed the secretary to take attendance.
Members Present: Staff Present:
Sean Becker Andrew Epple, Director of Planning
Cathy Costakis Chris Saunders, Assistant Director of Planning
Dawn Smith Doug Riley, Associate Planner
Donna Swarthout Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary
Brian Caldwell
Members Absent: Guests Present:
Chris Mehl (excused) Rick Hixson, City Engineer
JP Pomnichowski (excused)
Erik Henyon (excused)
Bill Quinn (excused)
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 was no public comment forthcoming, President Pro Tem Caldwell closed the public comment portion of the meeting.
ITEM 3. MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21, 2008 (Cont. from 11/5/08)
Due to the number of members absent, the minutes of October 21, 2008 were continued to the next meeting of the Planning Board.
ITEM 4. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 5, 2008
Ms. Swarthout stated she would prefer to see the specific language of the Objectives she had proposed included in the minutes. Due to the number of members absent, the minutes of November
5, 2008 were continued to the next meeting of the Planning Board.
ITEM 5. Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-08008 (Mandeville MaSub) - A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application on behalf of the property owner, City of Bozeman, and
the representative, Great West Engineering, to allow the subdivision of 85.35 acres into 22 lots for M-2 (Manufacturing and Industrial District) development. The property is legally
described as COS No. 2153, Tract
A of COS No. 939 and Tract 1, 3, & 4 of COS No. 1723, NW ¼, Sec. 36, T1S, R5E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. (Riley)
Associate Planner Doug Riley presented the Staff Report noting the Pre-Application review had been completed last year and the Preliminary Plat was the second stage of review. He noted
the zoning district for the property was M-2 and was consistent with the City’s growth policy. He stated the location of the site was within two Entryway Corridor’s and described the
adjacent properties. He stated any future development would be subject to design review and the recommended conditions required architectural guidelines, landscaping, and coordinated
fencing. He noted the lots had the ability to be aggregated dependent on the user. He noted one of the key features of the subdivision was a proposed rail spur to serve 12 of the lots
and the 9 lots on the east side of the creek would not have rail access but would accommodate users that would not need it. He stated there would be an existing watercourse that would
be protected per the conditions of approval and the stream/watercourse setback requirements. He stated the key access would be across from Reeves Road extended and would be the extension
of Wheat Drive while the existing Red Wing Drive would be abandoned to provide for the newly proposed Red Wing Road to provide future connections to the south and east. He directed
the Board’s attention to the aerial photo of the site and a blown up plat of the site for more clarification. He stated there had been two specific Variance requests regarding the required
level of service at the intersection of Oak Street and North 7th Avenue and the block length and width standard requirements from the Unified Development Ordinance. He stated the rail
spur limited additional pedestrian considerations through the larger industrial lots and noted the east west roadways were limited as well due to the stream corridor. He stated the
thirty foot alley would greatly improve the circulation on the lots on the east side and Staff was supportive of the variance request for block length due to that consideration. He
stated the western portion of the property had ample opportunities for additional connections into the subdivision for future development applications. He directed the Board to the
public comment that had been received earlier in the day, presented the Wetland Review Board comments regarding their review, and presented the City’s responses to those comments. He
stated Staff recommended approval of the proposal with Staff conditions.
Terry Threlkeld of Greatwest Engineering addressed the Planning Board. He stated Planner Riley had mentioned that the site had originally been purchased for a transfer station but that
had not been feasible. He stated there was a need for a railroad spur and the property was bordered by Highway 10 and Interstate 90; he added the visual impacts of the Entryway Corridors
would need to be addressed. He noted the wetlands and floodplain would be areas that would not contain structures and the thought had been to create a linear park and to incorporate
a trail. He directed the Board to a rendering of the parks and trails that existed in the area and noted the connections could be made on future pad sites. He stated the Pre-Application
had been before the Planning Board in September of 2007 and the initial layout had been different than what had been originally proposed as Laurel had a similar geographic layout of
roads and railroads and the original proposal would have created the potential for problems. He noted that parkland is not required but had been included as an amenity and would give
people who worked there the opportunity to walk around and have a place to eat lunch. He stated he had included a cost estimate that was roughly 1.8 million dollars for the rail spur
to be installed on the site.
Ms. Costakis asked for clarification with regard to the locations of sidewalks within the proposal. Mr. Threlkeld responded the subdivision would contain all City standard sidewalks,
curb, and gutter throughout and an extension of Wheat Drive would be constructed with the sidewalks not likely to be installed due to the drain fields in that location. He suggested
the railroad did not like pedestrians located too closely to the railroad. Ms. Costakis stated she wanted clarification that the trail connections would be made through the site safely.
Planner Riley responded which sections of the sidewalk would be used to provide the necessary trail connection to the north. Ms. Costakis asked if there would be widening of the intersection
required for the proposal. Mr. Threlkeld responded the North 7th Ave. and Oak St. intersection was the one in question and the study had shown the addition of lanes would require the
purchase of land and only made the existing problem transfer to the next intersection (the ripple affect). He stated they would signalize the intersection of Red Wing Drive to help
mitigate the impact of the development. Ms. Costakis asked that the pedestrian accommodations be beefed up to provide more safety at the intersections. Mr. Threlkeld responded it would
be one step at a time with the review of the proposal and there was a fairly limited scope of what could be addressed.
Ms. Smith asked if the Mandeville Creek open space area was the City setting an example or meeting a minimum requirement. Mr. Threlkeld responded he believed the City was setting an
example by creating the open space in the subdivision as open areas were not required for industrial parks by the UDO. He noted the property line could have been drawn to the watercourse
and sold instead of used for the creation of usable open space. Ms. Smith asked how the users of the subdivision would access the open spaces. Mr. Threlkeld responded the users would
be able to use the sidewalks through the site to access open space areas and the trails could eventually be connected.
Lynn Bacon of the Wetlands Review Board thanked Mr. Threlkeld regarding the submittal of extra materials for WRB review. She stated item one referred to the setback requirements being
revised and the WRB would like to see a copy of the revised plan and that all the requirements for each zone in the wetlands were being met. She stated the Board had a number of wetland
experts and they saw that hydrological connectivity was maintained; she suggested culverts were often suggested, but super excavating with course grade pit run (in the range of an annular
4-6 inch and covered in geotech fabric) had been suggested for the proposal. She noted the WRB wanted to see the Final Site Plan prior to its approval.
President Pro Tem Caldwell stated he thought the WRB’s advice was important and the avoidance of difficulties in other areas seemed to be the goal. He stated his concern in recommending
a specific construction technique would be if it didn’t accomplish what is was intended to. Mr. Threlkeld responded that the wetlands consultant would be worked with closely to determine
what costs would be involved and they would include all the costs in an estimate once information had been compiled. Ms. Bacon stressed that the most important fact was to cover the
pit run with fabric.
President Pro Tem Caldwell asked if there would be sufficient areas to handle storm water given that the calculations had been incorrectly presented. Mr. Threlkeld responded there was
a standard calculation that would be exceeded to accommodate site surface runoff but more than
adequate area was available.
Ms. Swarthout asked if the Woody’s request that any buildings on the Frontage Road be aesthetically appealing would be addressed by Staff. Planner Riley responded specific conditions
had been included the recommended approval from Staff, the Design Objectives Plan and design review would be required for each site, and design guidelines would be required to provide
coordination of design and landscaping along the roadways. He noted the landscaping along I-90 would be required to be installed in the initial phase of development.
Mr. Becker asked if there was a tenant for any of the lots with regard to their purchase. Planner Riley responded the fire department had requested one of the lots be reserved for a
future municipal facilities noted in condition #5. Mr. Becker asked if a transfer station were proposed would it fit into the development. President Pro Tem Caldwell added that a
transfer station would be a permitted conditional use. Mr. Becker stated that his intent was to potentially provide for the future need for a transfer station. Planner Riley indicated
that a transfer station would require Conditional Use Permit review and approval; including a public hearing.
Ms. Costakis asked if there would be any sustainability features for the storm water runoff. Mr. Threlkeld responded there was no detailed design as of yet and those features could
be considered with the installation of buildings.
President Pro Tem Caldwell stated he had thought the site constraints and the M-2 industrial development needs made the variance request for block width and length appropriate. He asked
if the Board members were in agreement. The Board concurred.
Ms. Smith stated she was supportive of the Variance request for block width and length due to the proposed orientation to the Interstate and Frontage Road (fronts of lots to the public
ways).
Ms. Costakis responded she was supportive of the proposal but was concerned that the land use might change and the configuration as proposed would become inadequate. Mr. Becker suggested
the intent was not to hold the City to any higher or lower expectations but to treat development equally.
President Pro Tem Caldwell stated he felt the addition of width to the intersection would create pedestrian conflicts and that, given the distance to North 7th Avenue and Oak Street
he was supportive of the Variance request to the level of service standards at oak Street and North 7th Avenue.
Ms. Costakis stated the intersections needed to be improved more for pedestrians than for vehicles and suggested widening intersections would defeat that purpose. She stated she understood
the need for improvement but did not want to see an intersection like 19th Ave. & Main Street.
Ms. Swarthout suggested this site could become an “intellectual zone” and would provide a great opportunity to use the land for the creation of high-tech goods and jobs.
MOTION: Ms. Swarthout moved, Ms. Smith seconded, to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Commission for Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-08008 with the proposed
Staff conditions and including that the applicant consider the incorporation of storm water sustainability into the proposal, consider pedestrian improvements at the intersections, and
present the Final plan/plat to the Wetlands Review Board prior to Final approval. The motion carried 5-0. Those voting aye being President Pro Tem Caldwell, Mr. Becker, Ms. Costakis,
Ms. Swarthout, and Ms. Smith. Those voting nay being none.
ITEM 6. TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE (2007) (Epple/Hixson)
Planning Director Andrew Epple joined the Planning Board and introduced City Engineer Rick Hixson. He noted the review of the document had occurred at the Transportation Coordinating
Committee but the Planning Board would be reviewing pertinent sections tonight. He explained the State requirements for the formation of the Transportation Coordinating Committee and
noted the Committee included representatives from the Pedestrian & Traffic Safety Committee and trails and cyclists which represented a lot of different interests in transportation.
He stated there had been discussion regarding equestrians but Staff and TCC had concluded the equestrian paths were not directly a part of the transportation systems. He noted there
were sections in the plan that dealt with travel demand and the increase of roadways within the City of Bozeman to allow for the increase of traffic through more efficient use of what
existed. He noted the TCC had been working on the draft of the document over the past 18 months. He directed the PB to those chapters he had provided for their review and discussion
and clarified what those chapters addressed. He stated a consultant had prepared the draft based on comments from advisory bodies and had subcontracted a consulting firm with regard
to the pedestrian and non-mtorized transportation aspects of the draft. He noted a section had been included to provide distinction between different types of bike facilities and would
accommodate all of them based on their appropriateness from a roadway to roadway basis. He stated Gallatin County was supportive of a requirement for complete streets and Ms. Costakis
had helped make it a common element in community development. He noted the planning process had yielded a good document and all new traffic, population, and level of service analysis
would be included. He stated some discussion of local street standards had been included, but the document was focused on the primary and major street networks. He noted the standard
of providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be incorporated as a complete street design requirement.
President Pro Tem Caldwell opened the item for public comment. Seeing no public comment forthcoming, the public comment period was closed.
President Pro Tem Caldwell suggested that 9 ½ foot wide drive aisles had been approved in Missoula and asked if the requirements could be reduced in Bozeman. City Engineer Hixson responded
that there were locations where it would work, but there were locations where it would not work and noted an outside lane would need to be wider to prevent an accident occurring around
a corner. He added that people perceived items on the side of the road which created a feeling of friction ultimately causing them to slow down. He noted the design of the road would
need to accommodate the necessity of moving people in certain locations and slowing them down in others. Director Epple noted the necessary sizes for lane widths and gave examples of
which locations those widths would likely be instituted.
Ms. Costakis noted one location she had visited had transitioned from a multi-lane highway to a 9 foot wide two lane road; she suggested it was possible to accommodate larger vehicles
on 9 foot wide lanes. She asked if Staff was supportive of the complete streets policy. Director Epple responded he would expect it to become the guiding policy for the City if it
was adopted by the City Commission. Ms. Costakis asked if the rural road standards included shoulders and asked if those requirements would be alright with the County. Director Epple
responded the County road standard was rarely used in the City and added the language had been included for the County. Ms. Costakis suggested roads without shoulders were unsafe.
Director Epple clarified that the County would include shoulders, to the extent that they could, on future construction with the adoption of the updated Transportation Plan.
President Pro Tem Caldwell suggested the Planning Board review the document and make an attempt to discuss any issues they might have with Engineering and Planning Staff before the December
5, 2008 comment deadline.
ITEM 7. BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN UPDATE
1. Executive Summary (Saunders) (Cont. from 11/5/08)
2. Implementation Appendix (Saunders) (Cont. from 11/5/08)
3. Glossary of Terms Appendix (Saunders) (Cont. from 11/5/08)
Mr. Becker suggested appendix X – Background – should include community initiated.
Ms. Costakis stated she was hoping the Executive Summary was more descriptive as the average person might only read the summary. She stated she wanted to add width of streets, sidewalks,
and trails after Subdivision in the Implementation Index and under Zoning in the Implementation Index a definition of public health should be included. Assistant Director Saunders responded
the language existed in other documents but a broader definition could be included to address physical health and activity instead of just sustainability and water quality.
Review and discussion of Chapter 16 – Implementation – excluding Housing chapter (Saunders)
Assistant Director Saunders noted the chapter specified the way the City would implement the policy and what prioritization method would be utilized. He stated the difference between
policy and action implementation was that policy was more long term and action was more specific with regard to a timeline. He stated the intent was to list each item only once, in
the chapter most applicable to the item to prevent confusion.
President Pro Tem Caldwell stated he appreciated the information obtained through the Clarion Report and the audit of the City of Bozeman Growth Policy.
Ms. Swarthout stated she liked the layout and suggested the Planning Board and Staff make certain that the requested edits be included in the final document. Assistant Director Saunders
responded Staff would do their best. President Pro Tem Caldwell suggested keeping open communication with Staff and suggested the Planning Board review the document as it progressed
through the process.
Ms. Costakis suggested it seemed like there was a lot of language regarding arts & culture or historic preservation which she thought was great, but there was only a small number of
lines addressing pedestrian and bicycle; she suggested including language that would reference the Transportation Plan. President Pro Tem Caldwell added the Bicycle Advisory Board should
be included in drafting that language.
Assistant Director Saunders suggested the Board submit comments for the draft prior to the December 2, 2008 meeting of the Planning Board. He asked if the current formatting should
be retained or if the “goal” should be first, the “objective” second, and all the “implementation policies” listed beneath. President Pro Tem Caldwell responded he thought the proposed
formatting could help condense the document and was supportive of the new formatting as proposed.
ITEM 8. NEW BUSINESS
President Pro Tem Caldwell stated the Board had discussed methods by which the Board could become more streamlined and concise in their deliberations and suggested the Board consider
discussing efficiency at a future meeting. Ms. Swarthout stated she agreed with President Pro Tem Caldwell and suggested the Board bring comments to the next meeting. President Pro
Tem Caldwell suggested the Board had done well not to reiterate comments that had already been made at the evening’s meeting.
ITEM 9. ADJOURNMENT
Seeing there was no further business before the Board, President Pro Tem Caldwell adjourned the meeting at 9:18 p.m.
__________________________________ __________________________________
Brian Caldwell, President Pro Tem Chris Saunders, Assistant Director
Planning Board Planning & Community Development
City of Bozeman City of Bozeman