HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-06-05 Planning Board Minutes.docTHE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD
TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2005
MINUTES
ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE
Vice President JP Pomnichowski called the meeting to order at 8:05 p.m. and directed the secretary to record the attendance.
Members Present Staff Present
Dean Drenk Susan Kozub, Associate Planner
Erik Henyon Jami Morris, Associate Planner
Mike Hope Dave Skelton, Senior Planner
Dave Jarrett Andrew Epple, Director, Planning and Community Development
Jeff Krauss
Ed Musser
JP Pomnichowski
Jane Stroup
Visitors Present
Ralph Johnson Richard Reid Dan Cowles Neal Ainsworth
Doug Minarik Barry Brown Scott Dahlendorf Mike Cole
Occupant of 301 North Valley Drive Deb Stober Ted Lange
Steve Hoffman
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.}
Vice President Pomnichowski OPENED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD ON ANY PUBLIC MATTER WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE PLANNING BOARD AND NOT ON THE AGENDA.
Deb Stober requested the staff reports be made available on the web site prior to the meetings.
Vice President Pomnichowski called for further public comment, and hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
ITEM 3. MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 15, 2005
Vice President Pomnichowski called for corrections or additions to the minutes of
November 15, 2005. The minutes were approved as submitted.
ITEM 4. PROJECT REVIEW
A. Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application with variances #P-05057 - (Northside). A Minor Subdivision Preliminary Plat with variances approval, requested by the owners, Montana
Avenue Partners, LLC, represented by Comma-Q Architecture, Inc. and HKM Engineering, Inc., to allow the subdivision of ~3 acres into 4 commercial lots and one common area. The property
is zoned M-1 (Light Manufacturing District), is described as Lots 1-32, Block 1, Imes Addition, and is located in the SW¼ of Section 6, T2S, R6E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County,
Montana. The property is located at 1237 North Rouse Avenue. (Kozub)
Associate Planner Susan Kozub presented the Staff Report, noting verbal comments were received at the DRB and one written comment was received after packet distribution.
Mr. Drenk asked what the particular variances were. Planner Kozub further explained the variances.
Clint Litle, HKM Engineering, noted they are in concurrence with the Staff conditions. He discussed the deferred improvements on Rouse Street as being due to MDT’s planned improvements
to North Rouse Street. He announced a public meeting to be held tomorrow at 7:00 p.m. in this room. He noted it is a redevelopment project.
Doug Minarek, Comma Q Architecture, stated he felt this was an opportunity to improve this area of Bozeman. He stated the structure on the corner would be pulled back from the corner
and the corner would have a defined curb.
Ms. Stroup asked how the building would be pulled back. Mr. Minarek noted they plan to have the east 15 feet torn down.
Vice President Pomnichowski OPENED THE HEARING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, and hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE HEARING.
Mr. Henyon asked how the sidewalk issue would be mitigated. Mr. Minarek noted the sidewalk would be moved next to the structure, then onto private property within the project. Ms.
Stroup noted her questions had been answered.
Mr. Jarrett asked if there were improvements being done at the Pea Cannery next door. Mr. Litle said no, and noted Martel Construction is working on one of the buildings within this
project for Lone Mountain Gymnastics.
Vice President Pomnichowski noted the distance from Rouse Avenue to the driveway seems to be too short. Planner Kozub noted her concern is a relaxation which can be granted by City
Engineering and does not need to be noticed.
MOTION: Mr. Musser moved, Mr. Hope seconded, to recommend approval of application #P-05057. The motion carried 8-0.
B. Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application #P-02012D - (Laurel Glen III). A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application for Laurel Glen Subdivision, Phase III, requested
by the applicants/owners Hinesley Family LP, Chuck Hinesley, represented by C&H Engineering & Surveying, Inc., to remove condition #9 of Preliminary Plat Approval for Laurel Glen Subdivision
I – IV(#P-02012). (Skelton)
Senior Planner Dave Skelton presented the Staff Report, described the changes which have precipitated this application, reviewed the conditions, and noted no public comment had been
received. He stated DRC recommended approval of the modification.
Mr. Musser asked if the build-out has happened sooner than expected, or what had precipitated this request for the modification of condition #9. Planner Skelton noted the limitation
on the phases was put into place to encourage the development of the SID for improvements to Durston Road. He noted the situation has changed in the last few weeks as the City Commission
directed City staff to create the petition for the SID.
Mr. Drenk asked for an explanation of the understanding was that was agreed to between the applicant and the City. Planner Skelton discussed the procedure for implementing SID’s for
street improvements. He noted a moratorium to inhibit growth would have slowed the improvements; therefore, City Commission chose not to use that tool. He noted the developers took
the lead to move forward with the SID. Mr. Drenk noted the original condition #9 dealt with the “letting of the contract” for the improvements.
Mr. Krauss asked for the percentage of build-out at the end of Phase 2. Senior Planner noted the build-out would be about 45%. Mr. Krauss noted this was in line with the Rosa development.
Mr. Jarrett further explained the creation of the SID by the developers. Mr. Hope noted one of the last hurdles to beginning the improvements was to obtain the right-of-way. Senior
Planner Skelton noted the supposition was that the SID would move forward more quickly than it has. Mr. Drenk noted condition #9 seemed to have been imposed for safety reasons.
Matt Cotterman, C&H Engineering, noted they concur with all the conditions.
Mr. Krauss asked how practical it was for them to work on improvements to the subdivision while improvements are being done to Durston Road. Mr. Cotterman noted other routes would be
used.
Vice President Pomnichowski OPENED THE HEARING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
Ted Newman, 535 Valley Drive, stated the no-build stipulation had been expanded and relaxed, yet the improvements to Durston Road haven’t been started. He suggested no construction
within the new subdivisions should be allowed until the improvements to Durston Road are completed. He noted there are many more vehicle trips for each home while they are being constructed,
further impacting the streets in the area.
Vice President Pomnichowski called for further public comment, and hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING PORTION OF THE MEETING.
Mr. Drenk noted he hasn’t been convinced that lifting the original condition #9 is necessary. Mr. Musser noted the sequencing of the improvements to Durston Road will coincide with
the housing construction in further phases. Senior Planner Skelton noted the request is to lift or modify the condition to mirror conditions in more recent subdivisions. Mr. Drenk
noted the traffic counts are projected to be the same with three more subdivisions coming on line.
Mr. Hope noted the construction of the extension of Oak Street alleviated traffic on Durston Road. He noted the original condition was imposed for safety reasons. He asked if the
construction traffic had been considered when the condition was written for other subdivisions. Planner Skelton concurred with Mr. Hope’s comments on the extension of Oak Street. He
noted he relies on Engineering Staff to review traffic being generated by a subdivision. Mr. Musser noted he lives on North 21st Avenue, and he stated he felt the improvements to Babcock
Street and the extension of Oak Street have not increased traffic, even with the additional traffic from new subdivisions. Ms. Stroup clarified the questions. Mr. Krauss noted the
question is a timing issue. Mr. Jarrett noted it is a logistics problem also. He noted he felt the contractors and developers involved could work it out. Mr. Hope noted one of the
reasons he moved from North 20th Avenue was for the safety of his children. Mr. Jarrett stated we don’t understand traffic until we have visited a large foreign city. Mr. Hope noted
he is concerned with children’s safety when crossing Durston Road to attend the elementary school on Annie Street.
Discussion followed on street improvements and whether or not the requirements were slowing construction of affordable housing. Mr. Hope stated the community is responsible for public
safety.
Chuck Hinesley, developer, gave a brief history of the phases. He noted he wants the same completion percentages as other subdivisions have received after his subdivision was approved.
He described the lawsuit against SWMBIA, and that he and Walt Wolf filed to free the impact fees for street improvements. He stated he is requesting equity. He stated he wouldn’t
have a single house built in Phase III by the time the improvements to Durston Road are completed. He described the alternative routes for construction vehicles, and the improvements
he has installed for the City,
including those to Durston Road and the signalization of the Cottonwood Road and Huffine Lane intersection.
Director Andrew Epple noted the way an agreement such as being discussed is approved is through the current process. He continued, Mr. Hinesley is attempting to obtain the same agreement
as the two subdivisions to the east received two years later. Director Epple noted Planning Staff is depending on Engineering Staff’s conclusion that this request is approvable.
Mr. Krauss explained the history of the subdivision. Mr. Hope noted the subdivision should not have been allowed to proceed until the improvements to both Babcock Street and Durston
Road were completed. He stated growth had to be better planned and based on previous bad decisions. He stated he is still concerned about safety issues. Ms. Stroup stated that, because
leap frog development is discouraged, all development is concentrated in one place.
MOTION: Mr. Krauss moved, Ms. Stroup seconded, to recommend approval of application #P-02012D as conditioned and recommended by Staff. It was noted that construction traffic routes
would be addressed. The motion carried 8-0.
C. Major Subdivision Pre-Application #P-05061 - (Lydens). A Major Subdivision Pre-Application, requested by the applicants, Greenwing Teal, LLC, and the owners, William B. and Lois
A Lydens, represented by Allied Engineering Services, Inc., to allow the subdivision of ~13 acres into 49 residential lots. The property is described as being the Smith Subdivision
Tract 8 Less the West 165’ located in the N½ of the NW¼ of Section 11; Smith Subdivision the West 165’ of Tract 8 located in the N½ of the NW¼ of Section 11; and the Unplatted TR in
NE¼ of the NE¼ of Section 10 (Deed Book 155 PP. 56 & 57), all situated in T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located at the southeast
corner of the intersection of Durston Road and Fowler Avenue. (Morris)
Associate Planner Jami Morris presented the Staff Memo, noting this project and the following project will be discussed together. She described the alternative solution for the design
of Fowler Avenue. She expressed the concerns of Engineering Staff that if the pathway is permitted on the west side of the ditch in the existing right of way, the right of way for the
expansion of Fowler Avenue would be lost forever. She noted if the ditch is moved, the pond would be filled. She described the recommendations of City Commission during informal review.
She noted the letter from Dawn Smith expressed concern that the wetlands would be filled. Planner Morris noted their consultant has determined there are no wetlands in the development.
Mr. Jarrett asked if the proposal for the property had been discussed at an earlier meeting with the Board. Planner Morris stated it was discussed informally earlier this year.
Mr. Drenk asked how cash-in-lieu of parkland is calculated. He asked how and where the money is spent. Planner Morris noted in this instance the applicants have asked to use the money
to install the trail to Cascade Street. She noted Staff is troubled with the location of the trail and the loss of the right of way for the expansion of Fowler Avenue.
Mr. Krauss noted the City would gain a fully constructed three lane road, and additional 10 foot easement for the trail corridor, and the moving or piping of the ditch, which will remove
the ditch, which he stated is a liability for the City. He discussed options for improving the three lane road to five lanes.
Neil Ainsworth, 50 East Julie Court and developer of said property, stated neighborhood meetings have been held, they have agreed to construct the full three lanes, and Staff and City
Commission have been involved with the design.
Chris Budeski, GVRE and applicant’s representative, described the development of the project, and how moving the ditch would allow for the construction of two additional lanes sometime
in the future. He noted the trail and landscaping would be installed. He stated the existing trees are located in the ditch and would be removed. He noted they would install new trees
with an irrigation system to sustain them. He noted they have been told if the ditch is moved, they would have to pipe it. If the ditch remains, they would turn over the maintenance
of the ditch to the City and it would become the City’s liability. He stated they would become a part of the Durston
Road SID and would extend Durston Road to the Fowler Avenue intersection, wherever it is
determined to be located. He asked that the determination of the location be done soon as they need to known where it will be for design and spring construction. He noted they would
complete the trail connection from the subdivisions to the west to Emily Dickenson School to the northeast.
Mr. Krauss asked Mr. Budeski to compare the proposed street section to the section in the Transportation Plan. He explained the comparison.
Mr. Jarrett asked what would be constructed on Lot 5. Mr. Budeski noted they plan to construct 8 cottages on the lot. He noted it allows them more flexibility.
Vice President Pomnichowski OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
Steve Hoffman, 3425 Broadwater Street, described the connectivity of the project, and the attempt to retain as many of the existing trees as possible. He noted he didn’t feel the ditch
would be removed as it is a major blow-out for the Farmers’ Canal. He asked how much farther east the roadway would have to be moved for the 37 foot right-of-way to not impact the ditch.
He asked for a definitive answer in the near future. He stated he felt the local community would accept the project as proposed.
Mike Cole, 302 Sweetgrass Avenue, stated he takes to heart the future of the width of
Fowler Avenue; however, Fowler Avenue isn’t five lanes to the south.
Marty Stewert, 3303 Bitterroot Way, noted the proposed subdivision is very good. However, she suggested the trail be on the east side of the ditch from the road to protect the backyards
from being exposed to the street. She stated nobody wants a road in their back yard; however, lot owners in this area knew that a street would be there someday.
Ted Lang, GVLT, noted GVLT has considered this to be a major trail corridor to link the northwest part of town with the rest of town with a safe bike/pedestrian trail. He described
advantages to having trail connections and green spaces. He stated the trail and green space were a worthwhile trade off for the loss of the small park. He discussed buffering of
the trail from the street or homes. Mr. Krauss asked if there was interest in continuing the trail to the south. Mr. Lang noted they have heard from several property owners to the
south who wish to continue the trail south of Huffine Lane.
Deb Stober, 395 NorthValley Drive, asked if the 37 foot standard meets the Transportation Plan objectives. She noted it was a surprise to her that an offer had been made to move the
ditch to increase the right-of-way. She noted a lot more traffic would be put on Fowler Avenue with the development of the Bozeman Gateway Commercial Center. She questioned the placement
of the trail corridor. She noted the pond had been there for at least 20 years. She stated the pond is vital to her neighborhood. She asked for a good storm water plan for the development,
and that the state enforced restrictions on existing County subdivisions be included when properties are annexed.
Ted Newman, 535 Valley Drive, noted if the trail continues on the west side of the street, there is a need to take 10 feet from the Frenchs’ property. He suggested the trail be continued
all the way to Babcock Street.
Mike Cole, 302 Sweetgrass Avenue, noted the placement of the trail on the east side of the section line would eliminate all of the lots on the west side of their proposed development.
He stated he didn’t feel that was fair to the developer. He noted the trail on the east side would take up half of Frenchs’ land.
Vice President Pomnichowski called for further public comment, and hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
Mr. Budeski responded to several questions. He noted to move the street further to the east would require moving the ditch 10’ to 12’. He noted Fowler Avenue to the south is very wide
and could accommodate at least three lanes. He noted the placement of the road on the west side in the existing easement would be an option. He noted to have a three lane section on
either side of the ditch means the ditch would have to be moved.
Director Epple noted the 37 foot section diagram is not one of the typical designs included in the Transportation Plan, which has caused Engineering Staff some consternation. He noted
Fowler
Avenue is located on a section line and will be a minor arterial street. Mr. Hope asked if the proposed road section provides good flexibility for the future. Mr. Krauss noted the
proposed section provides all the amenities as the one in the Transportation Plan just in a different configuration. Director Epple noted Mr. Newman’s comment of completing the trail
to Babcock Street rather than cash-in-lieu is a good option. He noted the City Commission would resolve the issue of whether the street is a two or three lane facility.
Mr. Budeski noted even when the two extra lanes are added, the right-of-way is adequate to retain the trail facility.
Mr. Krauss stated there is a vision for a trail from north of the Interstate to the far south. He noted this project is a chance to start that trail. He noted another piece of the
trail is located in the Bozeman Gateway Subdivision.
D. Informal Application #I-05038 - (French). An Informal Application, requested by the property owner, Celia Wood, represented by Robert L. French, to consider the road alignment
between Lydens’ Subdivision and the French property. The property is described as being Tract 3B, COS 1069A and situated in the SW¼, NW¼ of Section 11, T2S, R5E, PMM, City of Bozeman,
Gallatin County, Montana. The property is generally located on the northeast corner of the intersection of West Babcock Street and Fowler Avenue. (Morris)
Rob French, applicant, asked for comment on Phase 2 of Pleasant Valley Subdivision. He noted the extra 10 feet of right-of-way needed for the trail would shrink the lots on the west
side of the development. He didn’t want to be in a bind when he wanted to develop his property. He asked if the trail is really viable. Mr. Jarrett suggested the two developers work
together to make the road and trail connections work.
Mr. French stated he felt it was better to have a street facing lots rather than lots facing an alley . He noted in one scenario the lots would lose width and it would be more difficult
to subdivide their land.
Vice President Pomnichowski noted there are 12 double fronted lots on one scenario, which are discouraged by the City. She suggested backing several lots to one another to align the
street with the Lyden’s subdivision. Mr. French described the ditch/stream which runs along the east edge of his property and empties into the existing pond on the Lyden property.
He asked where the water in the ditch would flow if the pond were eliminated. He noted most of its flow is from runoff. He noted the stream used to connect to the ponds to the south.
Vice President Pomnichowski noted there seems to be a little more room for lots if not installing the central street. Mr. Krauss noted the houses along Fowler Avenue have to be double
fronted. Director Epple noted Planner Morris has drawn a couple configurations that more closely align with the street and alley in Lydens still connect with Valley Drive.
Mr. Krauss suggested the applicant seek design help. He noted the two developers need to work together to maintain connectivity of the streets to the north.
Mr. Jarrett concurred with Mr. Krauss.
Mr. Budeski noted the 60 feet of right-of-way was thought necessary if the ditch wasn’t moved. Now the ditch is being moved, so they may not need the 60 feet. This may solve Mr. French’s
problem.
Vice President Pomnichowski OPENED THE MEETING FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
Mr. Budeski noted he felt the two developers could work together to create connectivity. He noted he preferred the alley diagram as it provides connectivity with the subdivision to
the north.
Deb Stober, 395 North Valley Drive, stated she recommends that R-1 zoning be placed on the properties.
Mr. Cole noted placing the trail on the east side of the roadway doesn’t work for the Frenchs’ property. He stated he felt they would have to redo streets and eliminate several lots.
He recommended the trail be completed from Durston to Babcock, on the west side of the creek.
Vice President Pomnichowski called for further public comment, and hearing none, she CLOSED THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION OF THE MEETING.
Mr. Hope asked about R-1 zoning. Director Epple noted Staff could support some R-3 in the southern portion in alignment with the land to the west.
Mr. Musser noted it is critical that the two land owners work together.
ITEM 5. OLD BUSINESS - None
ITEM 6. NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Hope reminded the new Board members they should have no conversations with applicants, supporters, or the opposition prior to the meeting. He stated that discussions need to be
held at meetings where all can hear the same information.
ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before Planning Board, Vice President Pomnichowski adjourned the meeting at 11:03 p.m.
_____________________________________ ____________________________________
Andrew Epple, Director JP Pomnichowski, Vice President
Planning and Community Development City of Bozeman Planning Board