Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-16-10 Planning Board Minutes PLANNING BOARD MINUTES TUESDAY, MARCH 16, 2010 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE President Caldwell called the regular meeting of the Planning Board to order at 7:06 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: Trever McSpadden Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director Brian Caldwell, President Greg Sullivan, City Attorney Chris Budeski Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Erik Henyon, Vice President Jeff Krauss Bill Quinn Members Absent:Guests Present: Eugene Graf, IV Elizabeth Bird Ed Sypinski Danielle Scharf 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.} Elizabeth Bird addressed the Planning Board. She stated she wanted to address the issue of turning Babcock and Mendenhall into one way streets and noted their primary concern was the need for bike lanes downtown. She stated she had passed out the results of a survey done a couple years ago and noted one of the major concerns was getting around downtown on bicycles. She stated their sense was that it would be easier to have bike lanes on those streets if they remained one ways and retained one side of parking. Mr. Quinn joined the Planning Board. Ms. Bird stated parking would need to be eliminated on both sides of the street if the streets were changed to two ways. She stated the downtown area was a bottleneck and smoothly moving traffic that would be safe for pedestrians was their goal. She stated the community would be better off considering refuges at the intersection so people felt safe crossing both lanes of traffic. She suggested a left hand side bike lane with a one way street would work best in her mind. She stated the more walkable and bikeable an area is would create more use of that area; she added it would advance the economic stability of downtown as well. She stated if the land uses along the streets were changed instead, there would be more use of the area. Seeing no further public comment forthcoming, President Caldwell closed the public comment portion of the meeting. 1 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 2010 MOTION: Mr. Budeski moved, Mr. McSpadden seconded, to approve the minutes of February The motion carried 4-0 with Mr. Henyon abstaining. 17, 2010 as presented.Those voting aye being President Caldwell, Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Budeski, and Mr. Quinn. Those voting nay being none. Mayor Krauss joined the Planning Board. ITEM 4. BOARD MEMBER ORIENTATION (Sullivan/Kissel/Saunders) Attorney Sullivan stated he had been invited to the meeting to discuss issues related to the Board’s conduct, substance, etc. He noted there were a couple things that it would be good for him to cover and encouraged the Board to ask any questions that may arise. He directed the Board to the appearance of fairness and ex-parte communications language as well as the City of Bozeman Code of Ethics document. He stated he would include a discussion regarding the findings of the Board. Attorney Sullivan stated the Appearance of Fairness document indicated a difference between what the law required and what the citizens thought; the law would allow the conflict to go down the road further than the citizens would. He stated the public thought things differently than the law required. He stated the document had been codified in Washington, but was not a part of Montana law. He stated it was developed as a method to assure that due process methods bolster public confidence in fair and unbiased decision making. He stated that during the review of applications the Board should be aware that members of the public may think Board members represent a certain group in the community and added the Board had a responsibility to make decisions with integrity. Attorney Sullivan stated the City’s Code of Ethics required a Board of Ethics and had changed over time and he had presented the Board with copies of the current Code. He stated the Board bylaws would need to be examined to determine they were not in conflict with the overriding Board of Ethics document. He stated the Commission had made significant changes regarding Whistle-blowing provisions and they had not been included in the copies for the meeting. He directed the Board to the Standards of Conduct which laid out specific rules on how the members/employees would need to behave; he directed the Board to the last sentence of section 060 regarding harassment/retaliation and added that could be the most important statement in the document. He stated the Conflict of Interest section was confusing and recent amendments had been proposed to clarify and simplify the section. Mayor Krauss added the golden, get out of jail free card was to call Attorney Sullivan and ask questions if in doubt. President Caldwell stated the concern of the Board was the professions of each of the Board members; he explained that if Thinktank had a project that would be reviewed by the Board, his partner would present the proposal. Mr. Budeski added that he was a one-man show right now and the Conflict of Interest scenario would come up. Attorney Sullivan stated the Code of Ethics 2 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. would prevent Mr. Budeski from bringing any projects before the Planning Board or the City Commission, but his employee could bring the proposal forward; Mr. Budeski would have to excuse himself from that agenda item at the meeting. Attorney Sullivan suggested if the Board member perceived a possible conflict, they could call and ask either he or Attorney Cooper. President Caldwell stated item E on Conflict of Interest was pretty clear on whether it was a personal or professional interest. Attorney Sullivan noted an example would be that a Board member would be allowed to represent their Homeowners Association. Mr. McSpadden asked if the circumstance would need to be announced right away. Attorney Sullivan responded Mr. McSpadden was correct. Vice President Henyon asked how to separate personal and professional issues at the podium so the public didn’t think the person was representing the Board. Attorney Sullivan suggested an announcement that they are a member of the Planning Board but are in attendance and commenting on a personal matter. President Caldwell clarified that if any one member were to represent the Board; it would be discussed prior to the representation and agreed to by the Board. Attorney Sullivan stated the Board of Ethics was set up to be able to initiate an investigation for recommendation to the Commission. He defined ex-parte communications and suggested the Board be very careful with the review of a subdivision. He suggested if the Board was in legislative mode, such as reviewing the ordinance, ex-parte communications would not really apply, but when the Board was reviewing a submittal to the Planning Department, the Board members should not be around the applicant in the community; he added that the community was so small that it would be nearly impossible to avoid seeing an applicant and noted there was a difference between listening to what people said and discussing the issue at length. He stated if there had been a conversation it would need to be announced at the meeting the topic of discussion and an announcement by the Board member that the decision would not be based on the information obtained through those communications. Interim Director Saunders noted that materials provided by Staff to the Board were a part of public record and questions from the Board members could be directed to Planning Staff members. Attorney Sullivan concurred the applicant should not be contacted by the Board and Staff should be contacted instead. President Caldwell asked Attorney Sullivan to address e-mails from Board members to other members. Attorney Sullivan responded those e-mails were part of public record. President Caldwell asked if City of Bozeman e-mails could be provided to the Board as suggested by Mr. Budeski at the last meeting. Interim Director Saunders responded he had inquired with the City IT Department and they were not willing to provide a City e-mail address to the Board members as the adopted rule was that City Staff only. Mr. Budeski asked how City Commissioner’s e- mails were handled. Interim Director Saunders responded the Commissioners were City employees and given a City e-mail address. President Caldwell suggested a discussion on a Planning Board member e-mail account be on the next agenda. Attorney Sullivan added that the Board could e-mail amongst themselves, but if they had a quorum, it was a public meeting; he suggested the Board would not want to make the public suspicious of the Board as they would lose trust in the decisions the Board was making. Mr. Budeski asked if applications could be discussed outside of a meeting as long as there wasn’t a quorum present. Attorney Sullivan 3 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. advised against discussions regarding any of the applications and suggested the members could still get together and discuss things, but to leave the application talk to the hearings. Attorney Sullivan stated that when legislative or judicial changes were being made, Staff always included findings in the Staff Report to be incorporated into the final decision. He stated the decision would have merit and be upheld if every decision the Board made the findings were directly referenced. He suggested the Board consider Staff conditions as findings and incorporate the Staff findings as their own; this would help protect not only the Board, but the applicant asking for the decision. He stated if the decision wasn’t defensible everyone involved would lose time and money; he added Staff was tasked with giving the Board suggested findings and suggested Board members articulate why they disagreed with findings if that was the case. He stated the Commission could then identify the findings and adopt them to incorporate them into the approval of the proposal. Interim Director Saunders added that the City intentionally asked for a tremendous amount of detail in the submittals; this policy was instituted to make sure the application was thorough and well done to help prevent “new” evidence from being identified at the last minute. He stated there had been a case in Helena roughly a year ago; the neighbors challenged the subdivision decision by the Commission due to contaminated groundwater supposedly caused by the regular maintenance of the lawns in the subdivision and the City of Helena had lost the case. He stated there was a fair amount of latitude in the approval of subdivisions if the reason was fair and supportable. Mayor Krauss asked if Missoula had lost the case due to findings. Interim Director Saunders responded he thought Mayor Krauss was correct and suggested Staff would provide well founded, well reasoned rationale and suggested Board members have similar reasons they were not in support of the recommended findings. President Caldwell encouraged the Board to take time to formulate thoughts and comments prior to the meeting for review of the proposal; it would move things along and help create the findings Mr. Sullivan was referring to. Interim Director Saunders stated that when a subdivision was appealed, it would be all of the documents related to proposal to provide a record of facts applied to certain circumstances and some things would not need to be reiterated word for word. President Caldwell concurred. Interim Director Saunders explained the noticing process for a public hearing and explained that during public meetings were noticed only via the agenda; he suggested advance notice for items on the agenda would be appreciated by Staff. Mr. Budeski asked if Board members could bring items to the Board. Interim Director Saunders responded items could be brought by members, but Staff and the President would need to be contacted and the Board would need to concur to present the item on the agenda. Assistant Director Saunders explained that, depending on the item, the Board could forward a recommendation to the Commission, directly to Staff, or mention the issue under New Business on their agenda. Mayor Krauss added that Complete Streets had been forwarded directly by the Board and suggested the member mention it under the New Business item on the agenda and if 4 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. there was concurrence amongst members, the item would be discussed at the next meeting. Mr. Budeski added the current Board members were a diverse, quality group. Attorney Sullivan stated that several years ago there was a controversial project in the Flathead Valley; essentially the court had said that whenever the public had comment, their comments would need to be addressed, no matter what comments were being made. He suggested the Board always address those comments on the record; the appearance of fairness. Interim Director Saunders added that not every single point, by every single person would need to be addressed individually and subjects could be grouped. Mr. Budeski stated he had not seen a lot of public comments being addressed and asked if it was a new policy. Mayor Krauss responded it was enhanced with the inclusion of Attorney Sullivan. Mr. Budeski asked if members of the public could be asked questions. Attorney Sullivan stated he would prefer a fine line between the close of public hearing and deliberations, but it would be at the discretion of the President. President Caldwell added that if the Board’s response to public comment would be better served by asking a question it would be a situation where questions would be a good idea; he cautioned that he had seen those discussions spiral out of control with back and forth dialog. Mayor Krauss responded it was a difficult thing to say no, but once the public hearing was closed, it should remain closed. President Caldwell responded he could make a statement to indicate that public comment after the allotted time could instead be written and submitted to either Planning Staff or the Commission. President Caldwell suggested Robert’s Rules of Order be discussed at the next meeting of the Planning Board. Attorney Sullivan responded the use of archaic rules should be avoided to help prevent confusion amongst members and the public but Robert’s rules should be used when necessary. President Caldwell stated he thought aggressive meeting tactics should not be used. ITEM 5. DISCUSSION ITEM 1. Feasibility studies for two-way conversion of Babcock Street and Mendenhall Street (Caldwell) President Caldwell stated the Downtown Improvement Plan called for a study to be conducted to determine the feasibility of converting Mendenhall and Babcock Streets to two-ways. He stated he felt the Complete Streets Ordinance had addressed multi-modal transportation and added the Board was not at a stage of review to discuss the items addressed by the public such as refuge areas and bicycle lanes. He noted multi-modal options would be discussed during the study of feasibility. He opened the item for Board discussion. Mayor Krauss suggested the Board review the Makers Plan as it would help in their discussions. Mr. Budeski stated he liked the one-ways as they are as it was a bypass of Main Street. He stated if they were reversed, left turns would need to be made. He stated the current design was efficient and he used the one-ways a lot. He stated he was not supportive of spending $20,000 to study the feasibility when it had already been studied. He added he thought the driving force behind the suggestion was to provide a parking space right in front of the store. Mayor Krauss stated he was not supportive of reversing the one ways. He stated the one ways 5 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. efficiently moved a lot of cars though he didn’t think that was what the community wanted. He stated if he was on the north side of Bozeman, he would have to use Lamme Street which was not intended for through traffic; there were no real east roads and that was currently Mendenhall Street’s function. He stated Olive Street had converted to a better through street with the installation of the light and the location of the post office; he suggested Mendenhall Street be converted to handle the traffic and keep it off of Lamme and Beall Streets. He stated there would be an opportunity to make the bus stop at the Parking Garage work with modification to Mendenhall Street. He stated even when 191 was closed the semi’s used Main Street and contributed to the lack of interest on the streetscape; the best thing for Mendenhall would be to turn it back to a two-way street, install trees, and address pedestrian travel. He stated he had a more difficult time making the argument on Babcock Street. Vice President Henyon stated in the Downtown Improvement Plan there was significant data indicating the conversion of those streets to two ways would encourage development in those areas. He stated Main Street had just been redone and added he would like to think there had been significant data with regard to those modifications. He stated he thought the data was already available through the Engineering Department which could be presented to the Board. He suggested the side/cross streets could be modified to one ways as well; traffic would move more smoothly and more parking would be provided. President Caldwell suggested the task could be split into two portions; the merit of the scope of work proposed and the money concerns. He stated Mr. Naumann of the Downtown Bozeman Partnership had provided public comment and had indicated that funding for the project could be discussed at a later date. He stated he thought it was important a thorough study be done to provide a reliable outcome. Mr. McSpadden asked how many studies needed to be done and cited Attorney Sullivan’s comments that fairness and not speed should be the goal of the Board. He stated each member could offer a philosophical opinion, but it was never bad to have too much information. He stated the Downtown Improvement Plan called for the study to be done. He stated what he personally liked with regard to the Downtown Improvement Plan was what had been proposed for the alleyways. He stated he was concerned with how the right of way would be obtained as well and a study should be done. President Caldwell responded he had spoken with two firms regarding the cost of the study and he understood cost was an issue, but there may be additional information as it would relate to economic viability. Vice President Henyon stated he agreed with Mr. McSpadden; he didn’t think the study should be foregone, but if the data was available already it should be utilized. President Caldwell concurred that the scope of work may be affected and the cost reduced if the community sought out the available data. Interim Director Saunders responded some of the data had already been compiled and some would be easier to obtain than previously. He stated Engineering Staff would be able to gather some of the data provided if they were not already tasked though he would not promise their services as they were not under his supervision. He stated much of the data had investigated reversing the two ways and the flow east to west rather than conversion of 6 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. the one ways to two ways. Mr. Quinn stated it seemed with the viability of downtown, the one unwanted thing would be to hurry traffic through the downtown area. He stated he was supportive of the conversion to two ways and he agreed with Mayor Krauss that Mendenhall Street would be the most important. He stated he thought it was a big deal with strong interest from the public and it would behoove the Board to do the best job they could and get the most possible information; he was supportive of spending the funds for the study though he was not in favor of replicating what had already been done. Mayor Krauss responded part of the study would need to be replicated due to the involvement of the Montana Department of Transportation; entities involved would be MDOT, the Downtown Neighborhood, and the City Engineering Department. He stated one of the steps would be to forward a recommendation to the TCC asking what would need to be specified in a study before MDOT would help fund it. Mr. Budeski stated the discussion had been really good and some items had been brought to his th attention. He stated Mendenhall crossed 7 Avenue and Willson Avenue and suggested the Board consider the impact to those intersections; changing the traffic patterns, all the street signs would need reversed, the public would need to be re-trained to turn into parking lots, etc. He stated perhaps the study was not detailed enough to support a decision by the Board. Mayor Krauss suggested the item appear on the TCC Agenda to ask MDOT what it would take in the scope of the study to get them on board. Mr. McSpadden stated the discussion would be more than just the traffic side of the issue and would need to include residential impacts as well. He stated the end product would require a lot more work. Mr. Budeski stated the Sanderson Stewart proposal was more detailed and 25 intersections would have traffic counts to provide a good baseline. Interim Director Saunders stated he hated to be the wet blanket, but MDOT would maintain that they would stick to their routine with regard to the RFP process. President Caldwell stated the folks from MDOT truly wanted to do what the community wants. He stated that going to MDOT at every step would hinder the progress of the proposal and he was supportive of the Sanderson Stewart study; he suggested the Downtown Neighborhood and Downtown Bozeman Partnership review the documents and provide comments. President Caldwell opened the item for public comment. Ms. Bird stated she had not heard one mention of bike lanes with regard to the study. Mr. McSpadden responded that pedestrian and bicycle facilities had been included in the Sanderson Stewart report. President Caldwell directed the public to the language including investigating pedestrian and bicycle facilities. th Mayor Krauss stated a study had been done for North 7 Avenue and suggested the Board review the study to see what significant details had been included. He stated access to businesses had been studied, amongst other things, and those items would need to be included in the downtown study. He stated he saw Mendenhall Street being empty with underutilized buildings based on the 7 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. street configuration in the mid 50’s and it needed to be changed even if it took five or six years. President Caldwell asked if the Board thought it would be appropriate to bring the proposals to the Downtown Improvement and TIF Boards as a potential path to get the study underway and forwarded to the Commission. Vice President Henyon asked if that would be necessary as Mr. Naumann had already provided comment in support of the study. President Caldwell responded he thought it would be necessary to acquire more defined comments. MOTION : Mayor Krauss moved, Mr. Quinn seconded, to ask for recommendations from the TIF and Downtown Boards, the City Commission, and the Transportation Coordinating Committee for their suggestions as to the scope of the feasibility study to satisfy their requirements for the consideration of conversion of the one way streets back to two way streets in downtown Bozeman (particularly Mendenhall Street). Mr. Budeski asked if a motion could be made at this time as it was only a discussion item. President Caldwell responded the motion was intended to provide clear direction in the minutes for the next step and not to approve the expenditure of the funds for any study. Mayor Krauss stated Mr. Budeski had just made a Point of Order (Robert’s Rules) and responded the decision on whether or not the motion was necessary was at the discretion of the President. Mr. Budeski expressed concern that one of the proposals was for Mendenhall Street only, but he was supportive of moving forward incrementally. Mr. McSpadden clarified that the intent of the motion was to acquire comments from each affected agency and to move the proposal forward. He stated in all fairness, there was an official way to request proposals. Mr. Quinn stated he thought the Board was doing their share as far as advising and recommending and inviting people to participate in the process. The motion carried 6-0. Those voting aye being President Caldwell, Vice President Henyon, Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Budeski, Mayor Krauss, and Mr. Quinn. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 6. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Mayor Krauss stated he was ready to reappoint Ms. Costakis but she had withdrawn her application so he had not nominated the final member of the Board; he added he did not think the Board should wait to elect officers until that appointment. He stated a President and Vice President should have had some continuity; if someone really wanted to be President they should make that known. Mr. Budeski asked if there was anyone there who would like to be President. Mr. Henyon indicated that he would be interested in the President position. Mr. Caldwell indicated he was also interested in the position of President. Mr. Henyon stated he had been the Vice President for five years and he would like to have the opportunity to hold the President position more 8 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010. frequently to provide for more efficient meetings. Mr. Caldwell stated he wanted to be President to help provide the opportunity to move items and agendas forward in the most effective and quick manner possible. He stated he was experienced and he knew Robert’s Rules was a shortcoming that he would look to fellow Board members to help him with. He stated there had been a standing item on the Board’s agenda and establishing an effective agenda was an important aspect for the Board. MOTION : Mr. Budeski moved, Mayor Krauss seconded, to open and continue the item to the The motion carried 6-0 next meeting of the Planning Board. . Those voting aye being President Caldwell, Vice President Henyon, Mr. McSpadden, Mr. Budeski, Mayor Krauss, and Mr. Quinn. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 7. NEW BUSINESS . There were no items forthcoming ITEM 8. ADJOURNMENT Seeing there was no further business before the Board, President Caldwell adjourned the meeting at 9:21 p.m. __________________________________ __________________________________ Brian Caldwell, President Chris Saunders, Assistant Planning Director Planning Board Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman 9 City of Bozeman Planning Board Minutes of March 16, 2010.