HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-17-05 Planning Board Minutes.docTHE CITY OF BOZEMAN
PLANNING BOARD
TUESDAY, MAY 17, 2005
MINUTES
AGENDA
CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD
COMMISSION MEETING ROOM, CITY HALL, 411 EAST MAIN STREET
WEDNESDAYTUESDAY, JANUARY 1FEBRUARY 155, 2005
7:00300 P.M.
(There is no Zoning Commission meeting scheduled)
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
President Harry Kirschenbaum called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Harry Kirschenbaum Susan Kozub, Planner
Jane Stroup Lanette Windemaker, Contract Planner
JP Pomnichowski Dave Skelton, Senior Planner
Sarah Alexander Andrew Epple, Planning Director
Mike Hope
Visitors Present
Bob and Betty Cline Scott Hacker Lance Lerner
Renee & David Baker Don Seifert Manfred & Edda Birk
Fred Leadbeater Luzann Bennett Henry Dowling
Ron Dingman Larry Witt Brian Witt
Ginny MacSween Al MacSween Ken Smith
Gary Leiberand Don Miller Jane Miller Schaaf
Doug & Melody Kurk
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.}
President Kirschenbaum called for public comment on any item not on the agenda. There was none.
ITEM 3. MINUTES OF MAY 3, 2005MINUTES OF JANUARY 4, 2004
ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-04059 - (The Village Downtown Amended Plat). A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat approval, requested by the owners, Village Investment
Group, Inc., to allow the re-subdivision of ~ 8 acres in the Amended Plat of the Village Downtown PUD that would allow a reduction in the number of residential townhouse lots from 32
to 28 lots. The property is described as Lots 101 through 145, Village Downtown PUD Subdivision and is located in the NE¼ of Section 7 and the NW¼ of Section 8, T2S, R6E, PMM, City
of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is located generally located east of North Broadway Avenue on both sides of Village Downtown Boulevard. (Windemaker)
President Kirschenbaum called for corrections or additions to the minutes of May 3, 2005. Ms. Alexander noted the edits she had proposed were not included in the Planning Board version.
It was decided to include the draft minutes in the next packet for approval.
B. Growth Policy Amendment Application #P-04060 - (Spring Creek Village Resort, Lot 5). A Growth Policy Amendment application, proposed by the owners, Michael W. Delaney and Ileana
Indreland, to amend the growth policy land use designation, as shown on the Future Land Use Map, from “Business Park” to “Community Commercial” on ~ 31 acres. The property is described
as Lot 5, The Spring Creek Village Resort Subdivision , and is located in the SW¼ of Section 10, T2S, R5E, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally
located between West Main Street/Fallon Street and Ferguson Avenue/Resort Drive. (Skelton)
ITEM 54. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-04062 - (Brady Avenue). A Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat application, requested by the applicant, Stockyard, LLC, represented
by ThinkTank Design Group, Inc., to allow the subdivision of ~ 2 acres into 4 residential lots. The property is owned by Tom & Susan Vander Vos, and is described as Lot 20, Block 7,
Babcock & Davis Addition, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located at north end of Brady Avenue, between Wallace Avenue and Ida Avenue. (Kozub)
B. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-04061 - (The Legends at Bridger Creek). A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat application, requested by the applicants, Brownstone
Capital, represented by Van Bryan Studio Architects, to
allow the subdivision of 20.12 acres into 65 residential lots. The property is owned by Aspen Properties I, LLC, is described as a tract of land being Tract 7A of Certificate of Survey
No. 2408, and is situated in the NW¼ SW¼ of Section 32, T1S, R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located at the northeast corner of the intersection
of Story Mill Road and Boylan Road extended. (Morris)
MEET JOINTLY WITH ZONING COMMISSION
C. Major Subdivision Pre- Application #P-04058 - (Creekwood). A Major Subdivision Pre-Application, requested by the owners/applicants, Snowload LLC, represented by Gaston Engineering
& Surveying, to allow the subdivision of ~ 38 acres into 53 residential lots. The property is described as a tract of land being the second tract described in Document No. 2012272,
situated in the E½, SE¼ of Section 32, T1S, R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located north of Bridger Drive, northeast of Headlands Subdivision.
(Morris)
A. INFORMAL REVIEW
Informal Application #I-04031 - (Churn Creek Meadows). An Informal Application, requested by the owners OBD Inc., represented by Springer Group Architects , P.C., to annex and provide
urban zoning of R-1 (Residential, Single Family, Low Density District) for 360 acres. The property is currently zoned A-S (Agriculture Suburban) in the county. The property is located
East of Story Mill Road, just east of the City of Bozeman Landfill. (Morris
B. UDO REVISIONS
UDO Policy Edits, if any have been returned from other reviewing agencies.
ITEM 56. OLD BUSINESS Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-05013 - (Valley West, Phase 3). A Major Subdivision PUD Preliminary Plat approval, requested by the owner and
applicant, Bozeman Lakes LLC, to allow the subdivision of 69.26 acres into 259 residential lots, 14 parks/open space lots, and one remainder lot. The property is described as Portions
of Tracts 2-4, Block 2, Tracts 1-3, Block 1, and the original Cascade Street, Valley West Subdivision, and is situated in the NW¼ of Section 10, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana. The property is generally located between West Babcock Street and at
Planner Susan Kozub presented the Staff Report.
Greg Stratton, applicant’s representative from Morrison-Maierle, Inc., noted he would
answer questions and take comments. He introduced Rob Pertzborn of Intrinsik.
Ms. Pomnichowski asked about the lot widths that don’t meet requirements. Mr. Stratton explained the lots are all standard widths. Ms. Pomnichowski asked why the DRC waived the Environmental
Assessment requirements, and if there would be a plat note about the high water table with cautions regarding basements. Mr. Stratton noted those materials were submitted earlier with
the original subdivision. Ms. Pomnichowski noted She was concerned with the dense population for the area with little neighborhood commercial area to serve it. Mr. Stratton noted the
B-1 zoned area is located next to Cottonwood Avenue. Ms. Pomnichowski noted the Certificates of Occupancies would be withheld until Babcock Street and Durston Road are improved. Mr.
Stratton concurred. Ms. Pomnichowski questioned if the 310 permits had been obtained. Barbara Vaughn noted it takes about 6 weeks for those to be reviewed. Ms. Pomnichowski asked,
regarding Section 35 of the submittal the park enlargement in the northeast corner, if the setback has been met before the impervious area is installed. Ms. Vaughn noted the wetlands
would be separated from the water course by a berm.
Ms. Alexander asked about how the boulevard open space will be maintained. Mr. Stratton noted by the homeowners’ association (HOA) as the existing ones are now. Ms. Alexander asked
when the HOA would be turned over to the homeowners. Mr. Stratton noted a certain amount of lots had to be sold prior to the homeowners taking over. Ms. Alexander asked if there were
trails through this phase. Mr. Pertzborn noted that is covered in Section 35. Ms. Alexander asked if there would be a trail through the open space. Mr. Pertzborn noted it is included
on the trails’ map. Ms. Alexander asked if the trails should be shown on the plat. Planner Kozub noted all trails should be shown. However, she noted sidewalks aren’t shown on the
plat.
President Kirschenbaum OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
Fred Burke, neighbor, asked what type of homes are proposed for lots #235-238. Mr. Stratton noted they would be condo units.
President Kirschenbaum called for further public comment, and hearing none, he CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
MOTION: Ms. Pomnichowski moved, Ms. Alexander seconded, to recommend conditional approval of application #Z-05013. The motion carried by a vote of 4-0, with President Kirschenbaum
abstaining.
B. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-05011 - (Cattail Lake). A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat approval, requested by the applicant, Cattail Lake, LLC, represented
by Morrison-Maierle, Inc, to allow the subdivision of ~ 42 acres into 86
lots for 134 dwelling units, roads, alleys, and park and open space areas. The property is owned by Rocky Mountain Timberlands, Inc. The property is described as Lot 3 of Minor Subdivision
#221, and is situated in the SW¼ of Section 26, T1S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located northeast of the intersection of Davis Lane
and the future Catamount Street. (Windemaker)
Contract Planner Lanette Windemaker presented the Staff Report, detailing the requested variances, noting the Wetlands Review Board had completed its review and had submitted condition
#4, reviewed condition #6 from the Parks and Recreation Committee, and distributed condition #16, which requires the owners to be responsible for the cost of the sewer lift station.
Ms. Pomnichowski asked if some of the lots were located within the watercourse setback. Planner Windemaker stated she would check. (I don’t remember this and it may just confuse things
because I think she was talking about around the lake.)
Ms. Alexander asked for an explanation for the waiver for the parkland dedication. Planner Windemaker noted it was requested to allow public access to the lake as the applicant was
using the lake as his parkland requirement. Ms. Alexander asked if the whole shoreline of the lake would be accessible. Planner Windemaker stated it would not as dedicated park of
the lake is but as privately owned park. Ms. Alexander asked if lots 25-35 are located within the wetlands, and if Steiger Lane is planned to be a City-standard street. Planner Windemaker
indicated the portions of the lots within the wetlands, and stated the street was proposed to be City-standard.
Ms. Stroup asked for clarification as to who is liable if there are problems with the lake, i.e. pollution, drowning. Planner Windemaker stated that if the lake were private, the private
owners would be liable, whereas, with it being part public and part private, the HOA and the City would be responsible.
Tom Henesh, Morrison-Maierle and applicant’s representative, reviewed the subdivision and the design challenges. He noted they would like to discuss conditions #4 and #56b as they disagree
that watercourse setbacks are required from the lake and they don’t feel restrooms in the park are part of the homeowners responsibility.
Mr. Hope asked what would prevent placing a home on one edge of Lot #48 and subdividing the lot for another home. Mr. Henesh noted it is a four-plex lot and no further lot splits are
permitted.
Barbara Vaughn, Vaughn Environmental Services, reported no permits have been requested to date as none have been required. She noted the lake was a former gravel pit with no wetlands
associated with it except on the south end. She noted a letter from the Corps has determined the
lake is not jurisdictional. She noted the UDO does not require setbacks along non-wetlands. Planner Windemaker clarified that the Wetlands Review Board realized this wasn’t a watercourse,
however, the Board did want the wetlands area protected.
Ms. Pomnichowski asked if the ground water depth was 2.84 feet. Mr. Henesh concurred. Ms. Pomnichowski asked if a flood plain delineation had been done. Ms. Vaughn stated it is a
small stream that has dried up each summer for the last three years; therefore a study wasn’t done.
Mr. Hope noted the Wetlands Review Board (WRB) seemed to have thought the wetlands would be jurisdictional. Planner Windemaker clarified that the WRB made a recommendation in the event
the wetlands were determined to be non-jurisdictional.
Bob Lee, Morrison-Maierle, Inc., noted the surface area of the lake is approximately 12 acres. He described the problems with the parkland located in a corner of a development as a
portion of the perimeter is under separate ownership, thus making access from some boundaries difficult. He noted it was difficult to provide the required 50% access to the park/lake,
then indicated the points of access within the subdivision. He noted it is an amenity for the community and the neighborhood, and the lake provides an amenity for trail connections
along Cattail Creek. He noted to make the area safer, he stated they propose to fill in the non-jurisdictional wetlands to the south to decrease the slope. He noted they would like
to do a wetlands enhancement area in the northeast portion. He stated it would make the lake on the east side more safer if the eastern bank is modified. He noted that, if the lots
along the non-jurisdictional wetlands are lost as well as the road relocated, the project becomes very difficult.
Ms. Alexander asked if the wetlands enhancement was on the table prior to the Wetlands Review Board review. Mr. Henesh stated the original plan was for the wetlands enhancement. Ms.
Alexander asked why the wetlands to the south were of such low value. Ms. Vaughn noted the value was decreased by the narrow band of the fringe wetlands area. Mr. Henesh estimated
the size of the southern wetlands to be half an acre. Ms. Vaughn noted the wetlands were isolated and little have little impact on wildlife as there are no animal trails or corridors.
She noted the lake function could be improved by extensive sloping. Mr. Henesh indicated the eastern area where the sloping is proposed. Ms. Vaughn noted the work would bring water
to within 12 inches of the surface of the land to create an enhanced wetland.
Mr. Hope asked if the subdivision should be required for the upkeep of the restrooms, which were for public use. Mr. Henesh noted they feel the restrooms are not needed. Planner Windemaker
noted the requirement was required in the park plan. Ms. Alexander asked who would maintain the public park and the parking lot. Planner Windemaker noted the HOA would be required
take care of it for seven years, then the City would then take jurisdiction until there was a park maintenance district. (Is the seven years something I am not aware of?)
Ms. Pomnichowski asked if the detention ponds on page 8 were located in the wetlands.
Planner Windemaker noted those referred to are located in Cattail Creek III and the drawings are rough.
President Kirschenbaum OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMEMNT, and hearing none, he CLOSED PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
Ms. Alexander commended the applicant on the mix of lot sizes and uses and the connectivity to Cattail Creek Subdivision. She noted she was willing to consider endorsing the plan as
it offsets the requirement. She suggested requiring a wetlands’ enhancement plan for the northeast portion of the lake. She noted as to the other conditions of concern, the restrooms
they are necessary in a public park.
Mr. Hope concurred with Ms. Alexander on the wetlands replacement. He stated there should be a plan submitted for the enhancement. He noted restrooms are part of a public parkland.
He noted they will enhance the project and provide a better environment. However, he could live without the requirement.
Ms. Stroup concurred on the wetlands replacement and a plan for it. She noted she was concerned about pollution, mosquitoes. She noted the installation of restrooms should not be required
of the developers. HShe stated the City should provide the amenity. Ms. Alexander noted streets, gutters, sidewalks are all installed by a developer for public use. She noted they
are also amenities for the community. She noted restrooms are a public health and safety issue. Mr. Hope noted he could not remember requiring restrooms to be installed by the developer
in any other park. President Kirschenbaum noted normally he could not see requiring the restrooms, however, without them, the public’s use of the amenity would be limited. Ms. Stroup
noted most requirements are for the people within the development as well as the general public. She noted the residents wouldn’t benefit directly from them. She stated the City should
provide the restrooms. Discussion followed on the number of lots that border the park compared to the number of lots located away from the park/lake. It was determined that there are
many more lots without adjacency to the park/lake.
Ms. Pomnichowski stated she concurred with Ms. Alexander’s comments on the mix of housing and uses. She noted she was confused about the request for a variance or deviation as either
is usually due to problems with an existing development. She noted she does not support the filling of wetlands or otherwise altering a water feature. She stated she does not support
eliminating the condition. She stated Cattail Creek is close enough to the lake to be a corridor. She stated she doesn’t support the request for less than 50% access to the park/lake.
She suggested that if the lots along the wetlands were eliminated, the access requirements could be met. She noted that by rearranging the lots so the rear yards back onto one another,
the wetlands could be saved. She noted there are some “privilege” lots which back up to the park/lake. She continued, she would defer to the WRB. She noted she supported all the conditions
recommended for the project. She stated deviations and variances are hard for her to accept on an open piece of land.
Mr. Hope asked if the whole lake will be public park. Mr. Henesh noted there will be parts of the lake that would be dedicated parkland and part would remain private. Ms. Stroup stated
the WRB may have a high ideals for wetlands.
Ms. Alexander stated she would like to see, on behalf of the applicant, a good faith effort by the developer to back off from the setback areas next to and within the wetlands area.
She suggested a middle ground proposal by the applicant. She suggested a more traditional type neighborhood with an alley by pulling the lots out of the wetlands.
Mr. Hope noted he couldn’t support the idea of omitting the lots along the park/lake as they are prime property.
MOTION: Mr. Hope moved, Ms. Stroup seconded, to recommend approval of application #P-05011 with removal of condition #4 and add a requirement for submittal of a plan for the wetlands
on the east side of the park.
AMENDMENT: Ms. Alexander moved to amend, Ms. Stroup seconded, the motion with the removal of condition #4 with the addition of a Wetlands Creation equivalent to what is removed. Ms.
Stroup seconded.
The amendment carried 4-1 with Ms. Stroup, Mr. Hope, Ms. Alexander, and President Kirschenbaum voting for the motion, and Ms. Pomnichowski voting against
The motion carried 3-2, with Ms. Stroup, Mr. Hope, and President Kirschenbaum voting for the amended motion and Ms. Pomnichowski and Ms. Alexander voting against it.
C. Growth Policy Amendment Application #P-05010 - (JCD). A Growth Policy Amendment , requested by JCD, LLC, to establish a “Residential” land use designation on the Bozeman 2020 Community
Plan Map on 196.4 acres. The property is owned by Jane L. Schaaf & Don H. Miller, 5534 Stucky Road, Bozeman, MT 59718, Hope Lutheran Church, 210 South Grand Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59715,
David J. & Susan H. Barbisan and Burton L. & Etheleen J. Hoovestol, 1845 Mount Ellis Lane, Bozeman, MT 59714, Mildred Boylan for Paul Boylan Trust, 1201 Highland Blvd, Apt. C223, Bozeman,
MT 59715, Shady Lane Ranch Limited Partnership, 4399 South 19th Avenue, Bozeman, MT 59718, and Marshal and Luzann Bennett 5532 Stucky Road, Bozeman, MT 59718. The property is described
as a tract of land being Minor Subdivision No. 235, the SE ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 23, described on Film 115 page 3747, the SW ¼ of the SE ¼, and the SE ¼ of the SW ¼ of Section 23,
both described on Film162 page
677, the Remainder of the NW ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 23 excepting those lands excepted on Film 162 page 677, the Remainder of the SW ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 23 excepting those lands
excepted on Film 162 page 677, and the concurrent common boundary realignment between Tract 2 of Book 152 page 474 Plat and Tract 7 Film 80 page 2066, T2S, R5E, PMM, Gallatin County,
Montana, and the adjacent public rights-of-way, and is located west of South 19th Avenue between Stucky Road and Blackwood Road. (Skelton)
Senior Planner Dave Skelton presented the Staff Report, and reviewed Criteria A on page 4 of the Staff Report.
Mr. Hope asked if churches are permitted in residential areas. Planner Skelton noted they are through a conditional use permit process.
Ms. Pomnichowski noted the scope of the Board is the four criteria in the Staff Report.
Ms. Alexander noted the public comment to be received at this time should pertain to the GPA. Later the ZMA will be considered by the Zoning Commission.
Greg Allen, representative for the applicant, noted they concur with the residential land use for this area.
President Kirschenbaum OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
Henry Dowling, 5532 Fowler Lane, stated he bought his property to live in the country. He noted they have electric fences, horses, and dark nights. He stated they don’t feel it is
time to change the land use. He stated he doesn’t support the installation of the sewer for the developer and he stated he didn’t move here to see the City take over the whole valley.
Don Seifert, 5700 Fowler Lane, noted the 2020 Plan didn’t contain this area for a reason. He noted the ground water is 18 inches or less below the surface in the whole area. He stated
the 2020 Plan was right. He stated the land will not grow houses well. He asked the Board to look at the area as a blank canvas and look at the area as a whole and paint the appropriate
picture at the appropriate time. He asked that the Board have a commitment to agriculture.
President Kirschenbaum called for further public comment, and hearing none, he CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
Ms. Alexander noted the City Commission has a difficult task. She noted the Board has the task of determining the use for the land if annexed. She noted she would support residential
land use if the lands are annexed. She noted she doesn’t want to see the properties developed as one acre
lots.
Ms. Pomnichowski noted she concurred with Ms. Alexander on the natural progression for land use change would be residential. She stated she finds the proposal does meet the four criteria
for Growth Policy Amendments and discussed the criteria in conjunction the proposal. Ms. Pomnichowski noted it is a disadvantage to have to consider a ZMA immediately following a GPA.
She suggested the applicant consider the inclusion of neighborhood commercial zoning in the area.
Mr. Hope asked what would happen if the City annexed but didn’t do the GPA. Planner Skelton noted the City Commission would require a land use designation with annexation. Ms. Pomnichowski
added that planning to include commercial uses in a residential area early is better than trying to put it in after the residential area is established.
Mr. Hope suggested the group in opposition to the GPA form five acre lots as a buffer to this development.
Ms. Stroup noted she felt housing costs in Bozeman were high due to the unavailability of residential lots.
MOTION: Ms. Alexander moved, Ms. Pomnichowski seconded, to recommend approval of application #P-05010 with contingencies. The motion carried 5-0.
President Kirschenbaum noted the UDO revisions need to be done. What are the feelings to holding extra off-week meetings to review them. All were in favor as long as there is a quorum
and all members be committed to attending. It was suggested the Board begin the meetings earlier. It was determined that one or two extra meetings would be required and should run
from 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.
ITEM 5. UDO REVISIONS – Continue with joint meeting with Zoning Commission following the above project reviews.
UDO Policy Edits requested for further consideration beginning with Edit #180.
Due to the late hour and the fact that Zoning Commission had three projects to review, President Kirschenbaum announced that no UDO Edits would be considered at this meeting.
ITEM 667. OLD BUSINESS
There was none.
ITEM 7. NEW BUSINESS
Ms. Pomnichowski stated she attended the Floodplain workshop, which she reported was very well done, and she announced she had the handout materials for any members who might want them.
ITEM 788. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
____________________________________ _____________________________________
Andrew Epple, Director Harry Kirschenbaum, President
Planning and Community Development City of Bozeman Planning Board