Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-11-19 MinutesCORRECTIONS TO MINUTES November 19, 1990 No new corrections November 26, 1990 Page 12 - Line 2 - change "as" to "at" MINUTES OF THE MEETING QPTHE CITY COMMISSION BOZEMAN, MONTANA November 19 1990 The Commission of the City of Bozeman met in regular session in the Commission Room, Municipal Building, November 19, 1990, at 3:30 p.m. Present were Mayor Hawks, Commissioner Goehrung, Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp, City Manager Wysocki, City Attorney Becker and Clerk of the Commission Sullivan. The meeting was opened with the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. None of the Commissioners requested that any of the Consent Items be removed for discussion, Minutes - November |a 1990 It was moved by Commissioner Oochrung' seconded by Commissioner Frost, that the minutes of the regular meeting of November 13 1990 be approved as amended. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Goohrung Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Swanson Commissioner Knapp and Mayor Hawks; those voting No. none, Decision - Conditional V Permit Joseph u Susan Billion allow construction of a 20,000-square-foot car dealership on the EJ, SE-,',, Section 9, T2S, R5E, MPM (northwest of intersection of U.S. 191 and Cottonwood Road) re- quested by Joseph and Susan Billion to allow construction of a ZO foot cur deal- ership on the east one-half of the southeast one-quarter of Section 9 Township z South, Range 5 east Montana Principal Meridian. The subject property is approximately 4-5 acres in size and is more commonly described as being located along the north side or U.S. Highway 191 just west of the Cottonwood Road/U.S. 791 intersection. City Manager Wysocki reminded the Commission that the public hearing on this appli- cation has been closed; and now is the time set for the decision. He then submitted to the Commission a memo from City Attorney Becker indicating that' although the City-County Planning Board has forwarded a recommendation for approval subject to twenty conditions, the statutory number of votes for formal approval was not met. He stated, therefore, the Commission should consider the Board's action as input into its public bearing process only, and not as a formal recommendation from that body. The City Manager submitted to the Commission a memo as prepared by Assistant to the City Manager Ron Brey lisflng specific questions for the Commission to address in order prior to making their decision. The Commissioners reviewed each of those questions in 11-1y-yo - z - torn an follows: 1. Is the site in question conceptually appropriate for a carefully de- signed PUD containing auto dealership(s) and related businesses? Master Plan conditions allowing commercial uses within residential areas and PUD criteria, both mandatory and variable, should be addressed in conjunction with this response. Commissioner Gnehrung asked if there have been any changes between the latest drafts in both the master plan and the zone code which apply to this question; the Assis- tant responded there have not, Commissioner Frost stated he has no proWem with this question, noting he feels the application adequately satisfies the master plan. He suggested, unw*vwr that since the Commission is not looking at the whole master plan for the entire parcel, this question cannot be adequately addressed. Commissioner Swanson noted that a review of the master plan clearly shows that commercial development is anticipated in nodes at intersections of arterials or arterials and collectors. He stated, however, that he still has a problem with the compatibility this proposed project will have with the R—O zone. He noted t»un; are many good points about this application, including the clustering, open space setbacks and landscaping; however, he is still concerned about compatibility with residential scale development in that zone. The Commissioner then cited development in the general area of South Willson Avenue and Kagy Boulevard over the past twenty to twenty-five years. He reminded the Commission that Mr. Kamp has compared this proposed development with the Southwood PUD. He fur- ther reminded the Commission that in 1*84 there was a proposal for a large grocery store; and it was denied because it was not determined compatible with the area because of its large scale. He noted that site is surrounded by open space, high-clonsity multi-fam/|y housing and single-family housing. He then acknowledged that it is difficult to compare the two areas; however, he does fo*| there are some similarities. Commissioner Swanson stated that, as well designed as this proposal is he does not fcr| it would be compatible, *v*o along a four-lane roadway. He also expressed concern that this development could impact how the remainder of the area will develop. He then stated that approval of this application would fundamentally alter what the master plan rou]|y intends for this sensitive area. Commissioner Knapp noted this is a planned unit development without the full' plan. She stated she feels there is enough flexibility in the master plan that the Commission could go to the next step and review the design elements. Commissioner GuchrunB stated he has reviewed the interim zoning ordinance; and it suggested that at intersections of major streets it is appropriate to consider uses other than those specifically listed in a zone as long as they meet the necessary design require- ments. He stated that while he shares some of Commissioner 3wanson'y concerns, he feels 17-|y—yo - J - that the number of intersections impacted by this typo of activity along this corridor are limited. He noted the burden then falls on the Commission to ensure that the remainder of the corridor is protected from additional commercial development. The Commissioner stated that depending on how the design objectives are laid out this project could meet the in- tent or the code for this area. Commissioner Frost stated that while he appreciates Commissioner S*anavn's obuor- vaUons he Dao|s there is a definite difference between Kagy Boulevard and U.J. Highway 191. attract- ing another one or two car dealerships into this proposed auto plaza, he worries even more about the compatibility issue. He also questioned if one dealership is not compatible with the area how can three he? Commissioner Swanson also raised the issue of promoting re- development within the city limits, and questioned h*° thait goal of the master pYan can be met when applications such as this are approved. He suggested that approval will simply remove the pressure to redevelop within the community because it will /oaaen the demand. Mayor Hawks stated he shares many of those same cnnoerms. He noted, however, that the plan allows for a certain amount of commercial development to occur at specified nodal points. Ba stated the question faced with this application is its size, noting that to aUmm each of the four corners of this intersection to develop in 20-acre commercial nodes would create an 80-acre: node only one-half mile from the city limits. He noted that this subject area will remain outside the city limits for quite some time, questioning whether it is in the City's best interests to allow such a situation to occur. The Mayor noted, how- ever that he feels an obligation to the property owner to allow what is contemplated in the new master plan and zoning documents. Mayor Hawks stated he is also concerned that the Commission is handicapped in making decisions of this type because the design review guidelines have not yet been es- tablished for the entryway corridors. He stated that while he does not feet a moratorium is appropriate, ensuring uniformity in the decision-making process is difficult. He noted that the Commissioners have stated an interest in maintaining the agricultural nature w|pn8 U.S' Highway 191. He stated that very distinct buffering between the highway and d,ve/- mpment is necessary along this corridor; and this proposal came to the Commission with inadequate buffering. Mayor Hawks stated that while the tptal plan for the entire zo acres should have been submitted with this original application, he understands that was not done due to a communication problem. He indicated that because of that misunderstanding and the |am* notification that such a plan was indeed necessary, he feels it appropriate for the Commis- sion to bend enough to proceed with this application, He then stated u willingness to pro- 11-19-90 - 4 - ceeu. Mayor Hawks asked the Commissioners for a yes or no response to this question; Commissioners Frost Ooehrong Knapp and Mayor Hawks responded affirmatively; Commis- sioner Swanson responded in the negative, Z. Do the design elements of Phase | of the proposed PWD provide for a design which if described in terms of development guidelines, would be sufficient for application to the remainder of an anprnvab/o 20-acre pUn! Commissioner Ovehrung noted that the Commission had recently approved a request to locate a car dealership on North 7th Avomuo within the city limits. He suggested that in this orcn the Commission must take steps to ensure that the proposed car dealership is not the focal point of the entryway. He noted therefore, that access and the central fo- cus of the development s,how|d be from Cottonwood npod rather than V.S. Highway 191. He suggested that such a re-orientation ovuW help to mitigate the visual impacts this type of development may have on this entryway corridor. Commissioner Frost stated that, again' without a master p|an, the design elements have not been established. He noted, however, that the open space element appears to be a positive element at least for this pnoject. He then asked if this same ratio of open space can be anticipated throughout the remainder of the development. He noted that the issue of landscaping versus asphalt must also be addressed, stating he hopes that the same rndv is not carried out through the remainder of the sites on a lot-by-lot basis. The Commis- sioner expressed concern that without the master plan for this project, it is not possible to know the answers to those questions. Commissioner Swanson noted that during the initial portion of the public hearing on this application, he asked Mr. Kamp if there was going to be additional open space with the remainder of the project; and the answer was "no the three-acre area near Baxter Creek is the total for the pn4coi. fie suggested that if the Commission approves this project' possibly the same percentage of open apace should be required and maintained throughout the project to make it appear smaller. Commissioner Swanson stated he also has extreme concern about the lighting for this project, stating he feels that issue must be carefully addressed in extreme detail. He noted that Mr. Billion has publicly stated his intent to use security patrols on his proper- ty; therefore, he feels that the hybdug can be installed in an aesthetically pleasing man- ner that can bm|p to address the security issue without lighting up the surrounding area as well. Commissioner Swanson then stated that the issue of signagc is also one which most be carefully considered. He stated that if' indeed this is a plaza, there should be one attractive identification sign on U.S. Highway 191. He noted that the remaining signs, for v1-7o-y0 - s - each or the businesses, should be monument-mounted signs within the pla,a. He stated he is ytrpm8|y opposed to the proposed signage. Commissioner Swanson than addressed the issue of loudspeaker system, stating be is strongly opposed. He noted that with current teohnp|v8y, a better paging system can he installed. He suggested that no loudspeaker system should be allowed on any site within this proposed plaza. Commissioner Swanson noted that using landscaping and benniog to minimize the /m- pact of the sea of asphalt when traveling along U.S. Highway 191 was previously dis- cussed. He suggested that the arrowhead shape of asphalt fronting along the highway should be broken up with an is/end of landscaping; and other burming and landscaping should also be used to minimize the impaot. He suggested that if the Commission decides to approve this application, these elements should definitely be addressed in the plan for the remainder or the site. Commissioner Knapp suggested the concept of using the s*ovnu off-ramp road which would be Auto Plaza Drive for most of the lots, or at least the first off-ramp r"uu which would be Cottonwood Road as the focal point for this development. She noted that under that o^ocmpt, businesses would face the road from which they gain access. Mayor Hawks stated concurrence with the comments regarding signage' noting that those signs should not be allowed to attract traffic from U.S. Highway 191 but should be oriented to Cottonwood Road instead. He stated he feels strongly about the need for buf- fering between the four-lane roadway and the large car display area, He also stated con- currence with the comments regarding lighting and open space. He noted that open space will provide a more rural appearance within the development, Commissioner Swanson noted that the importance of screening the northern bounda- ry of this site has not yet been discussed/ and he feels it is essential to provide adequate protection for future residential development to the north or this site, Commissioner Frost suggested that requirement for screening should also be carried along the west side of this parcel, from the north edge of the property to the stream cor- ridor, Commissioner Swanson noted that in Commissioner Goehrong's memo to the Commis- sion last week, he suggested that action he taken to ensure that cars are not parked on the grass in front of the asphalt for display. He noted that issue is important and should be addressed. Commissioner GoohronO noted that a list of elements contained in recent approvals includes that issue so he feels it is adequately addressed. Mayor Hawks raised the issue of allowing the applicant to proceed to a specified stage of development on this site prior to approval of the development guidelines for the ,l-ly-oo - s - entire project. Commissioner Frost noted that the Commissioners will not know if some of the design elements have been met until the entire master plan for the project is submitted for re- view, He then asked if there is any legal recourse if the conditions are not carried out through the rest of the master plan, Mayor Hawks suggested that a formal agreement be drawn to ensure that these con- ditions as discussed are met. He noted that would provide some sense of security that the project would move forward as the Commission desires. Commissioner Swanson asked staff to review the fist of elements for consideration which was just distributed. deci- sion-making process as well as the list just distributed. He noted that the Commission has already determined that this proposed auto dealership is conceptually appropriate on the subject sit=' He further noted that the Commission is now addressing the question of whether the design elements for this phase would be sufficient for the remainder of the project. He reminded the Commission that approval of this phase will set the standard for the remainder of the project. Mayor Hawks asked if the Commission can establish conceptual types of guidelines and then proceed with conditional approval of Phase 1. He acknowledged that such action can place the applicant at a slight disadvantage since he has no recourse. Assistant Brey asked if the Commission wants to retain final approval if it refers the design elements of this application to the Design Review Board. Mayor Hawks stated the Commission is currently establishing a concept; and he wants to review the final product, He then asked if there is anything about Phase I that is not addressing concerns for the balance of the twenty acres. Commissioner Frost noted a setback has been required along U.S. Highway 191, but no such setback has been mentioned along the north edge. Mayor Hawks responded it would be possible to require such a setback; and he not- ed that requiring extensive buffering would automatically provide an adequate setback. Assistant Brey stated that to meet the developer's desired timeframe, it is neces- sary to detach Phase I from the overall development guidelines. He noted that the devel- opment guidelines for the remainder of the project will be in accord with the approved Phase | plans. Mayor Hawks suggested establishing a timeframe for submittal of the development guidelines, possibly ninety days. Assistant Brey stated that Phase I should be incorporated into the overall document to ensure that it is included in the protective covenants and becomes a part of the entire ll-19-90 - 7 - vehicular and pedestrian circulation patterns. Commissioner Swanson reminded the Commission that on Page 0 of the original staff report, staff argues for n master plan for the entire development, rather than encouraging major investment with no assurance that the remainder will be approved. He stated he does not want to get into a situation where Mr. and Mrs. Billion have made a major invest- ment only to discover that the development guidelines hamper future development of the Mayor Hawks suggested that the agreement he had proposed earlier could help to alleviate those concerns and potential pitfalls; and the applicant could move forward with full knowledge of what might be required for the remainder of the project. Commissioner Goehrung asked what timeframe is anticipated for the plans for the entire 20-acre parcel, noting he feels it is imperative to have those plans in place prior to any further development on this site. sub- mitted to the staff' it will take over a month to complete the necessary reviews and public hearings' He suggested that the dp/p/npnr should be required to submit those plans with- in 60 days, or possibly even 45 days' so the review process can be started and completed in a timely manner. s. Can Phase | be approved for an auto dealership as designed (or revised per Item z) without completed development guidelines for the remainder of the PVD? Mayor Hawks stated that he feels the applicant was mislead during the early stages of the review process; and that is why the development guidelines were not submitted with this initial application. He stated that under any other circumstances, he would not be willing to separate the first phase from the remainder of th:e process. Assistant to the City Manager Ron Brey reviewed the discussion under the above question, noting that it appears the Commission wishes to send the design portion of this phase of the application back to the Design Review Board for additional revised recommen- dations prior to final approval of Phase |. He further noted that the development guide- lines are to be separated from the timeframe for this application; and those documents are to be submitted within a time specific sat by the Comm/ssion--45 60 or oo days. He them noted that the issue before the Commission under this quest/on is whether Phase / can be approved without the development guidelines being in place. Commissioner Frost questioned the beginning of work on Phase I before the Commis- slon approves the entire plan for that phase, particularly since the design portion must go through the DRB review process prior to final action. Assistant Brey stated that the PUD section of the interim zone code anticipates ap- proval of the master plan for the project prior to any development occurring. He noted 1l-l9-90 - V - that under this application the first phase is being considered prior to consideration or the development guidelines for the entire project. He noted that the approval process be- ing considered by the Commission at this time would allow for ground breaking and foundation work only; the only precedent which has been established to allow founda�tioo work occurred in instances where zoning approval has been obtained but the detailed building plans have not yet been prepared by the time that zoning approval has been granted. He stated that under this circumstance the Building Department allows the applicant to proceed with the foundation only, at his own risk recognizing that any revisions may cause changes in the foundation. He noted however, that no precedent has been established for allowing installation of the foundation prior to zoning approval, The Assistant then suggested that if the Commission wishes it could approve the footprint for the structure as proposed' with the applicant recognizing the risks that could be incurred in: moving forward without final appruva/' He noted that this would allow the applicant to draw a building permit for the foundation only prior to Onal zoning approval by the Commission for this phase/ however he will be unable to obtain a building permit for the structure until after that approval. Commissioner Frost cited recent approval of the expansion of the k-mart store as an example of not allowing the foundation to be poured prior to final approval of the land- scape plan, a|thuo8M aft other items have been approved for that application. Assistant Brey reminded the Commissioners that if they determine that Phase | can- not be approved without the development guidelines, action on this phase must be held un- di after those guidelines have gone through the entire rev/ow process and been approved. Mayor Hawks stated his interest in approving Phase | without the development guidelines in place. The City Manager suggested that under final approval for Phase /' the Commission could address issues which would sat the stage for the remainder of the project, such as where the building is to, he located, the intensity of the landscaping, where the accesses are to be located, where the cars are to be parked for viewing and where the customer parking is to be located. He then suggested that initial submittal of the development guidelines be required with 45 days' which will theoretically allow the process to be com- pleted bcronu p|antimg of landscaping and laying of aspha:|t. The City Manager then cau- tioned the Commission that adjustments of other elements of the y|ao could require relocation of the building. He also noted that to require islands of landscaping in the asphalt parking area could also affect how it is constructed. Each of the Commissioners discussed in turn their thoughts on the proposed location of the building. It was the general consensus that' although many of the elements of the plan have been discussed in light of possible revision the general location of the building l/-79-98 - s - appears to be acceptable. The City Manager asked if any of the Commissioners have concern about the proposed height and size or the structure and the stucco-type Umsb proposed; the Com- missioners indicated general concurrence with those proposals. Commissioner Cpehrung asked if there are any /imitations on the percentage of property that can be covered by buildings and paved parking areas in commercial u*velop- menzo. Assistant grey stated that in commercial zones all of the lot except for the required yard setbacks may be covered. He noted that in the R-O zone, 50 percent of the property in non-residential development may be covered by buildings; however, as- phalt is not addressed. He then noted that the Commission could incorporate additional vpam space requirements into the development guidelines for this planned unit development if they so desire. Mayor Hawks requested that the written agreement to which he has referred be prepared prior to final Commission action on this phase, due to the technical nature of the conditions for approval. Assistant Brcy suggested the standard condition that no building permit can be ob- tained until after final site plan approval ovum be revised to allow for acquisition of a foundation only permit prior to final site plan approval' with the remainder of the standard conditions to be imposed with Phase | plan approval. Upon the Mayor's request, the Assistant submitted the following recommendation for action. He recommended that the Commission vote to approve the building footprint for Phase | with the understanding that the design ingredients of the Phase | final site plan will be referred to the Design Review Board with direction from the City Commission, with the DRB recommendations to he submitted back to the Commission for Phase / final approval. He noted that action is to be taken with the understanding that there is conceptual approval for the remainder of the planned unit development and the requirement that the applicant submit development guidelines for the remainder of the PUD within 45 days' or Oo day,, Mayor Hawks suggested that the motion also include development of an agreement specifying the concerns stated under Item z above, to be signed by both the City and the applicants. Commissioner Swanson reiterated his position that he is not in favor of proceeding with approval of this phase without the development guidelines for the entire project in place, noting he is not convinced that it can be compatible with the master plan and zon- ing designation. City Manager Wysocki reminded! the Commission that action on approval of this phase 11-ly-vo _10- will result in risks bdmS incurred by bvd` sides. He suggested that if either side is un- comfortable with the written agreement which is to he prepmrnd, they should not sign it, It was moved by Commissioner Frost seconded by Commissioner Swanson, that the Commission approve the footprint of the building only for Phase |/ send the design ele- ments for phase | of this application back to the Design Review Board for additional recommendations based on design guidelines as discussed not only at this mo*oag but at the two previous City Commission meetings prior to final Commission action on Phase ]; arid that the Commission conceptually approve the overall planned unit development; require that the applicant enter into a signed agr=en,mt with the Qty prior to final action on Phase |; and require that the development guidelines be completed and ,"bm|u=d to the staff within forty-five days to begin the process of establishing the parameters for development of the entire 30-oorm parcel. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote. those voting Aye being Commissioner Frvst, Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp' Commissioner Goehrung and Mayor Hawks, those voting No none. Break - 4:46, to wsv p.m. Mayor Hawks declared a break from 4'*6 p.m. to *:so p.m.' in accordance with Commission policy established at their regular meeting of March 14 7983. Continued discussion decision Conditional Use Permit Joseph and Susan Billion al- tow R5E, MPM (northwest of intersection of U.5. - 191and Cottonwood Road) Mayor Hawks stated that during the break, he and Commisskmer Frost discussed the possibility that the Commission may not be communicating completely with the Design Review Board. Mo suggested, therefore, the Commissioners may want to meet with the DRB at their regular meeting, visiting the site to review the issues and concerns. City Manager Wysocki suggested it may be more appropriate to submit all of the minutes for this project to the DRB for their review prior to taking action on the design elements of Phase |. He then expressed reservation about the Commissioners attending an advis°ry board en masse and clena,tp making their decisions on an item coming back to the Commission for action. The City Manager then stated he has heard discussion about ^ Commissioner or two possibly assisting the applicant in creating the development guidelines which are to then be submitted to the Commission for action. He noted that causes those Commissioners to essentially become advocates of the guidelines without first accepting public comment. develop- ment guidelines during the preparation process, providing input which could assist the ap- plicant in producing the best possible document. 11-19-90 - 11 - Commissioner Swanson suggested the possibility of identifying one or two Commis- sioners, to respond to the DRB if they have questions. Commissioner Goehrung proposed that rather than identifying a ovvp|° Commission- ors to respond to oRB the Commission ask the QDB to prepare a "good, better, hest" scenario. He expressed concern that limiting their alternatives could result in also limiting their creativity in developing an extremely satisfactory resolution of the issues involved. Mayor Hawks suggested that the above discussions du not preclude the Individual Commissioners from forwarding their concern, to the DR8 for consideration. Continued discussion delay f proposed alteration to historic landmark site - Michael Torgerson - northeast corner of intersection of West Peach Street and North 4th Avenue; per DRB recommendations City Manager Wysocki submitted to the Commission a letter from Mr. Michael rorgcrson' dated November 16 1990; along with a copy of the letter from the State His- toric Preservation Office dated November 14 1990 which was addressed to Mr. Don White. He stated that the applicant has requested that action on this item be tabled until after he has ruooi°eu and reviewed his copy of the information from the State Historic Preservation Office. Commissioner Frost asked for assurance that no demolition permit will be issued during the period of time that this decision is tabled. It was moved by Commissioner Swanson, seconded by Commissioner Knapp, that the Commission table action on this item per the applicant's request, with the stipulation that no demolition permit be issued prior to Commission action, The motion carried by the fol- lowing Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp' Commissioner Frost, Commissioner Goehruog and Mayor Hawks/ those voting wn none. Continued discussion appraisal of City-owned' property for ibb excha The City Manager submitted to the Commission a memo from Recreation Superinten- dent Sue Harkin dated November 16 l*eo suggesting that if the lot by the water tower which has been listed on the auction bill can be acquired for $sso or less and no require- merit to pay the balance of the SID assessments, the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board would support obtaining it. She noted, however, that if those conditions cannot be mot the Board suggests that it remain on the list of lots to he auctioned. The City Manager reminded the Commission that due to statutory regulations, that recommendation is not an option; tbereh,re, he indicated the lot will remain on the list. City Manager Wysocki then submitted to the Commission a letter from Steve We![, Chairman of the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board, dated November 15, 1990, -8- not been held yet this month; however, it appears that it will be in orsskm next week. (5) Commissioner Goehrong submitted the following. (1] As of this date, six applications have been received for the ad hoc recycling committee; and several applica- tions are outstanding. He reminded the Commission that the deadline for applications is noon tomorrow. (2) Announced that the Local Government Center will sponsor a solid waste and recycling policy conference on Saturday December 8 from 9:30 a.m. to vyo p.m.; and various citizen groups and local government leaders from around the State will be invited. He noted the meeting will be xc/d on campus, and there will be no registra- tion fee although pre-registrations are requested. (e) Commissioner Frost submitted the following. (/) Requested that' as a result of last nmoh's update on 8"a/s a discussion of possible City assistance in acquiring right-of-way for the extension of KaBy Boulevard be placed on next week's agenda. The City Manager suggested, instead, that the Commission send a /otter to the Highway De- partment expressing their concerns and offering assistance. (2) Asked for an update on the sidewalk implementation plan. The City Manager responded that a copy of the design for Kagy Boulevard as well as a staff update on response to the recommendations for the sidewalk program will be placed on the December 3 agenda. (3) Requested that an update on the status of the installation of improvements at Life Link be placed on an upcoming agenda. (7) Commissioner Swanson stated that he attended the GDC retreat. He then requested that copies of the GDC goals and the Chamber of Commerce goals be distributed to the Commissioners for their information. (o) The City Manager expressed concern at the round table meeting' John Vincent projected that the MonTax bill is "d,o.a." but he does not know of any proposed alternatives to that legislation. (y) Commissioner Knapp submitted the following. (/) Attended Interagency Breakfast on Wednesday morning where a majority of the discussion centered around transportation. (2) Participated in Leadership Bozeman on Thursday, where economic de- ve|npment issues were discussed. She noted that participants noted it is difficult to get used to the City's concern about ensuring mice entryways to the community; however, they also expressed appreciation for that concern. (a) Attended the task force on aging an Friday. (10) Mayor Hawks submitted the following. (l) Announced a Health Department orientation session on Wednesday morning from 7:00 to 9-00 a.m. noting it is open to all interested Commissioners. (Z) Indicated he will draft a letter to the Highway Department regarding acquisition of the Kmgy Boulevard right-of-way. (l`) Commissioner Swanson suggested, in response to some of Mr. Frank Coy/e's /1-Y9-90 -l4- recent comments regarding the 8rids*r/Rouse entryway, that the Beautification Cnmn/uoe be asked to recommend five or ten projects which could »cpp to improve that entryway cor- ridor. He also suggested that the City Attorney could assist by providing legal advice on various issues, such as what could be interpreted as a nuisance. He noted that signs in disrepair and junk piles could possibly be addressed as nuisances, if that is determined hgn/. He proposed that enforcement of existing ordinances could also assist in this en- deavor. The Commissioner noted that this proposal fits within the Commission's goals; and it could be accomplished with o minimum of staff time in,v/vou. The Commission asked the Clerk of the Commission to draft a letter to the Beautification Committee, asking them to address this issue. Mayor Hawks requested that the City Attorney review the City's present ordinances to determine whether they provide the needed mechanism to aUow for such a program. Commissioner Goehrung cautioned that not all of the properties along North Rouse Avenue and Bridger Drive are located within the city limits. Consent Items The City Manager presented to the Commission the following Consent Items. Commission Resolution No 2820 requesting that the troot lights in 8LD No. 284 not be converted to high pressure sodiurn vapor light fix- tures COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2820 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BUZEMAW MONTANA, REQUESTING THAT THE STREET LIGHTS LOCATED WITHIN SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT LIGHTING B|5TRyCT N0. 284 NOT BE CONVERTED T0 HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM VAPOR LIGHT FIXTURES. tft con n~~ rh..~u/~ _ vm m.,+h AuthorEz:e:::gt::t:y::M::a:nager to sign - Change Order No. I - Lyman Creek Water System Improvements, Phase III - no change in contract time or dollar It was moved by Commissioner Goehrung, seconded by Commissioner Frost, that the Commissioners approve the Consent [tams as listed, and authorize and direct the appropri- ate persons to complete the necessary actions. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Aye being Commissioner Goehrung Commissioner Frost, Com- missioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp and Mayor Hawks; those voting No none. Recess - s:sn n.m' Mayor Hawks declared a recess at 5:30 p.m., to reconvene at 7:00 p.m. for the ualifications for assessment and abatement of asbestos n-10-sV Authorize City Manag er to sign Settlement Agreement with United Parcel Service Authorize City Manager to sign - Contract Documents for Lyman Creek Water Svstem Improvements. Phase III - Bozeman Sand and Gravel - - 1s - purpose of conducting the scheduled public hearing. Reconvene 7:00 Mayor Hawks reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m.' for the purpose of conducting the scheduled public hearing. Continued public hearing Conditional U Permit Michael / Lilly for High R Estates of Montana - allow construction of a golf course on a portion of Section 32, T2S, RGE, MPM (east of Sourdough Road and one mile south of Gofdenstein Lane) This was the time and the place set fmr the continued Puh/^c hearing on the Condi- tional Use Permit requested by Michael J. Lilly for High Ridge Estates of Montana to allow construction of a golf course on a portion of Section sZ Township 2 South, Range a East Montana Principal Meridian, The subject property is more commonly described as being located east of Sourdough Rnuu and one mile south of Go|denstein Lane, Mayor Hawks opened the continued public hearing. City Manager Wysocki distributed to the Commission a letter from Michael J. Lilly doted November 13 1e90 suggesting that the action taken by the City-County Planning Board on this item was not "official" under its by-laws. He d`ao distributed a memo from City Attorney Becker dated November 15 1990 which indicates that while he may not adopt Mr. Lilly's arguments, he does concur that this item is now before the Cmnm|uu]om without official recommendation from the Board, Associate Planner Dave Skelton submitted the staff rcport. He read into the record o three-pag letter received just prior to the meeting from Michael D. Scott, President of the Sourdough Ridge Homeowners' Association concerning not only this cunu/dooa| use per- mit but the subdivision itself and other potential subdivisions in the area as well. In his letter, Mr. Scott indicated this type of development will have unacceptable impacts on traf- fic on Sourdough Road; expressed concern about water quality and water quantity; and expressed concern about the impacts on wildlife in that area. He noted that Mr. Scott concluded his letter by indicating there are generally more questions than answers about Mr. Grant', proposal, including potential adverse financial impacts on County residents as welt as those issues raised abpwc and encouraging that it not he approved at this time. The Planner then highlighted the staff report as submitted. He noted that under this application, Mr. Harry Grant proposes to construct an 18-ho/e golf course on property which is zoned A5 Agriculture Suburban. The subject 662-acre parcel is situated so that approximately 160 acres are located within the City's zoning jurisdiction, while the remain- der is located outs/de. He noted that with the configuration and location of the proposed golf course, four holes and maintenance fad/iUvy are within the City's jurisdictional area. The Planner then cautioned the Commission that they are considering a small portion 17-l9-90 - lo - or the golf course only, not the subdivision. Hn stated, however, that for purposes of review or the four M»|es of the golf course, the impacts generated by the entire golf course have been considered. He noted that the staff has r*roi,mW an application for that portion of the residential development located within the City's jurisdictional area; that that application should proceed through public hearings in December. The Planner stated that bayed on the public interest criteria established for review of conditional use permit applications, staff recommended denial or this application. He stated that following its public hearing on this application, the City-County Planning Board concurred in that recommendation. Planner Skelton then reviewed the ma/pr elements which generated concern those being mem:r supply and sewage disposal; roads; traffic generation; fire protection; irriga- tion system; and impacts on wi/uUfo. The Planner stated that Limestone Creek runs through the subject property; and it is designated as a stream corridor in the master plan. He noted that the Fish Wildlife and Parks Department has requested that steps are taken to ensure no impacts are caused in the streambank corridor, including observation of the 35-foot stream setback require- ments and acquisition of the necessary 310 permits. The Planner stated that staff has re- ceived indication from State agencies that there are two other priority water rights on Limestone Creek; therefore, staff is concerned about whether the applicant can provide adequate water to irrigate the golf course. He cautioned the Commission that this concern in the staff report is based on information received; and they may wish to seek clarifica- tion from the applicant on that issue. The Manner stated that concern has been raised about the impart that development of this subject property might have on aquifers in the area. He noted that this concern applies to the houses which are proposed in conjunction with the golf course, and is not limited to the golf course itself. The Planner then addressed the issue of roads, noting that primary access to the golf course will be from High Ridge Road onto, Sourdough Road' which is currently a grav- el County road even though it has been designated as an arterial. He noted that a num- ber of discrepancies have been noted in the calculations of trip generations. He statod, however, it has been determined that the impacts to Sourdough Road will be greater than the road can currently accommodate. He suggested that at this time, the governing bodies must determine whether they wish to continue denying developments in this general area because of the inadequate road systems or if they wish to develop a mechanism for im- provement of the roadways so that additional development can occur. Planner Skelton stated that the subject 662-acre parcel currently lies in three dif- ferent rural volunteer fire districts: 342 acres in the Fort B|io Rural Fire District, 20 i)-1y-su -77- acres in the Sourdough Volunteer Fire District and 3�00 acres, are presently uncovered. He stated that the Chairman of the Sourdough Volunteer Fire District has requested that the entire 652 acres be annexed into their district. He noted that in addition to this fire prvtoction, however on-site mater fill facilities and sprinkler systems in the structures would be required. Planner Skelton then addressed the wildlife issue noting that steps must be taken to mitigate impacts which development on this property could create. He stated that the County Commission has addressed this issue through the conditions which it has placed on approval of the preliminary plat for this entire subdivision. He suggested that if the Commission decides to approve this conditional use permit for a golf course, than a similar condition should be attached. Mr. Mike Lilly, attorney representing the applicant, briefly highlighted the history of this golf course pr"pusa/. He noted that the planning process for the entire develop- ment began last spring; and one or the first concerns raised was ensuring ample open space is provided for the m|K which winter on this property. He noted that installation of an 18-ho|* golf course provides more than the amount of open space required for this de- velopment, and it also provides the open space necessary for the elk to winter. Mr. Lilly than stated that the golf course envisioned for this project is not typical for this area, rather it is based on a new format which is just becoming popular. He not- ed that rather than developing the entire area to be incorporated into the golf course, it is developed only around the tees, the greens' and those portions of the fairway when= the ball typically lands. He noted that this new format minimizes the amount of mainte- nance required and substantially reduces the am�ount of waver needed to keep the course green. He further noted that as a result of the conditions imposed by the County Com- mission on the preliminary plat for this development, the course is being developed as a public golf course, not solely for the residents of High Ridge Eatates, Mr. Lilly stated that in on unprecedented action, the Gallatin County Commission approved the preliminary plat for High Ridge Estates subject to zz conditions. He noted that those conditions address many of the concerns which have been expressed in the staff report as wr/( as during public hearings on this application. Mr. Lilly stated that under those conditions imposed by the Gallatin County Commio- yion o central water system will be installed unless the developer can adequately demon- strate to the State Department of Health and Environmental Science that another system is appropriate. He suggested that having the developer work with the DDES should allay concerns about the impacts this development might have on the quality and quantity of wa- ter in the area. He further noted that adequate water should be generated from the water rights in Limestone Creek to water the golf course, particularly in light of the format for 11-}y-en - m - rnnotruction. He indicated that if it is determined that source is not adequate' the appli- cant is prepared to drill wells as needed. Mr. Lilly noted that ensuring adequate water for the golf course is one of the conditions which was imposed by the Gallatin County Commission, suggesting that the City Commission may wish to impose a similar condition on this conditional use permit. Mr. Mike Lilly then addressed the issue of wildlife, noting there is a resident elk herd in that immediate area. He stated that inclusion of the ln—hn|o golf course in the primary effort which the applicant has made to address that issue, noting that a represen- tative of the Fish, Wildlife and Parks Department has expressed concern that the large subdivision will have a significant impact on those o|h- He then cited the Valley View Gn|r Coors* located only a short distance from this proposed development, noting that the new golf course would be in an even more natural state. He noted that issues such as fertiliz- ing and using insecticides will be carefully handled to ensure there are no negative im- pacts on the wildlife. He indicated that under the County's conditions, fencing will he utilized to address concerns about elk on the greens, per R@P guidelines. Mr. Mike Li/|y acknowledged that traffic is a major concern, however, he noted that the County Commission has required that the developer pave Sourdough Road from the southern boundary to the existing pavement, and to sign waivers of protest for the creation of R(D's to improve many of the other roads in that immediate area which resi- dents of that development may utilize. Mr. Lilly noted that envV`ur condition imposed by the County Commission for ap- proval of the preliminary plat is that the applicant must construct the golf course in its entirety prior to final plat approval. We expressed concern with this condition, noting that the golf course will cost approximately *z million to construct; then maintenance costs will begin before any lots can be sold and any houses built. He then requested that the Commission consider a revised condition, to require that the golf course be completed with- in three years after final plat approval. Mr. Mike Lilly stated that concerns about the financial success of this development are valid. He noted' hnwvver, that the conditions imposed by the County Commission, and the upfront improvements which it is requiring should help to wooura that the project will preu*c no financial hardships on residents of Gallatin County. Responding to Commissioner Swanson, Mr. Lilly noted that the City Commission is acting on only four hn[na of the 18-hole golf course. He suggested, however, that if the City Commission requires that the golf course be completed within three years after final plat approval, that could allow the applicant to sack an extension from the County Commis- sion. Responding to Commissioner Frost Mr. Lilly indicated that if it can be shown that nl-ly-m - m - the development has an impact on a specific City street, such as KaSy Boulevard, the ap- plicant would probably be willing to participate in a special improvement district to the ex- tent of the impact, Commissioner GochrunQ asked if the central water system is to provide adequate water to meet domestic needs as well as fire protection. Mr' Lilly responded in the affirmative, noting that one or the conditions imposed by the County Commission on the preliminary plat approval is to ensure adequate water supply for fire protection. City Manager Wysocki asked for the volume of water which Mr. Grant's third priori- ty water rights in Limestone Creek will produce. Mr. U/|y indicated the present landowner can respond to that question. Commissioner Swanson expressed concern that impacts on Sourdough Road have been addressed; however, there is no indication or any improvements to South Church Avenue' Mr. Lilly responded that the traffic counts which have been performed to date re- veal that a majority of the traffic which travels north on Sourdough Road will torn east or west on Kagy Boulevard, rather than continuing north on North Church Avenue. Commissioner Knapp noted the applicant has proposed to use water from existing ponds, impounded from Limestone Creek for irrigating the golf Course. She then asked if impoundment of those waters is allowed. Mr. Lilly responded impoundment is allowed, as long as the amount of water let out is the same as the amount coming in. Mr. Robert Lee planning consultant representing the applicant, noted that confor- mity with the master plan is one of the issues which must be addressed through the condi- tional use proceus. He noted that this golf course was, not a part of the original design; hnww"cr inclusion has helped to m=et u number of goals and objectives in the master plan by providing for clustered development with substantial open spwce, while serving to pro- tect the Limestone Creek corridor. He noted that the golf course also helps to provide a buffer ,trip and vis"a|/y set the development back from Sourdough Road. Mr. Lee stated that the golf course provides a mechanism for improvement and en- hancement of the open space being provided in this development, noting one of the issues raised at the Planning Board hearing is whether a golf course is an appropriate use of open space. Be then read the definition of open space from the master plan, noting he feels that a golf course is appropriate. Mr. Jack Sohunke Morrison-Maier|e engineers representing the applicant, ad- dressed the issue of traffic impacts. He stated that traffic projections for the gv([ course alone are about /o percent of the additional traffic projected at an estimated 3-percent in- 11-19-90 - m- crease each year over a 10-year period. He noted that the traffic study projected the traffic flow from the development and the impact that traffic would have on various inter- sections in that immediate area, Mr. Schunhe then noted that a review of Sourdough Rood and the projected impacts on that roadway revealed that substantial improvement is needed. He noted those improve- ments to be completed include widening and paving or that portion which is currently unpaved as well as some reconstruction northward from GvWenstcin Lane to Kagy Boule- vard to create a safer roadway. Mr. Schunke briefly highlighted the results of the traffic projections for the proposed subdivision and the breakdowns at each intersection. He noted that 2760 vehicle trips per day is projected for the subdivision and golf course; and 800 of that was prn- joct*d for the golf cvurse. He noted that if one assumes that one-half of the golfers are from within the subdivision and 10 rounds played per year, That would result in 400 vehicle trips per day for the golf course during the playing season. He reminded the Commission that this traffic would be incurred throughout the day' not just at peak hours. Mr. Schunhc stated that the projected traffic figures have been bused on the high- est possible use or each portion of the project. He suggested, therefore, that the figures listed may be high; however, he indicated the developer is interested in providing im- provements which will meat the greatest potential impact. Responding to Commissioner Knapp, Mr. 5choo4e indicated that approximately ao percent of the total traffic generated is projected to trove/ down Sourdough Road and Church Avenue. He then stated that he feels paving of Oo|densteiv Lane from South 3rd Avenue to South 19th Avenue, a project in which the developer has indicated a willingness to participate' should help to decrease the amount of traffic on Sourdough Road. Associate Planner Skelton distributed to the Commission o memo dated October 15 listing possible conditions for approval, should the Commission decide 10 approve this ap- plication rather than follow the staff's and Planning Board's recommendations. Mr. Ray Myers 5480 Sourdough Road, current owner of the property under dis- cussion, stated he has lived at that site since loox. He stated that Eagle Rock has water rights to 75, feet in the east fork of Limestone Creek; and his family has the water rights in the west fork of Limestone Creek. He stated that they begin irrigating in the spring, estimating they run 100 inches of decreed pm*ar. He noted that they continue to run water throughout the summer and to the end of September, indicating that sometimes the water drops to 35 or 40 inches during the mid- to /ate summer. He further noted that they have dug a couple ponds on the property; and the water from those could be utilized to supplement the stream water for irrigating the golf course if necessary. Mr. Myers then stated that non* of the water from this branch of Limestone Creek is used by 5wur- 11-19-90 -z7- dough Creek Properties. Mr, Terry £c»ap|vw attorney representing his parents as well as the Sourdough Protective Association, stated they are concerned about various issues, including the traffic impacts, water and other impacts which sprawling development may have on that area. He expressed concern that "Hurricane Harry's" representatives have now expressed an interest in seeking a revision to Condition No. 6 in the County Commission's approval of the subdivision so that they are not required to construct the entire golf course pr/or to final plat approval. He noted that at the present time there is no mechanism for ap- proaching the County Commission with such a request. He then noted that the applicant proposes to construct a $z million golf course; however, high-class golf courses are es- timated to cost $o to $o million. Mr. Schap|v° noted that none of the conditions imposed by the County Commission on the preliminary plat would mitigate the impacts to South Church Avenue; and he feels that issue should be carefully addressed. He also noted that the staff report lists eight times more vohoc|ea per day than the applicant's representatives have projected. Mr. Soh^p|*w then questioned whether adequate water will be available for irrigat- ing the golf course, in part dun to evaporation and drainage through the soQ from the ponds. Be noted that the requirement for a central water system does not apply to the golf course; and he does not believe there is adequate water flow in Limestone Creek. He then highlighted the staff report, which indicates that the Department of Natural Re- sources and Conservation has records showing prior rights to those for the subject prop- erty in Limestone creek. Mr. Terry 5chap|ow no�ted that the staff report recommends a "do not pass," and the City-County Planning Board concurred in that recommendation. He then requested that the Commission concur in that action as well. Mr. Arvin Morris. s«so Fox Trotter Lane, stated that he has recently purchased his property as his retirement home. He stated he does not know if the wells needed to pro- vide water or the septic system for this development would have an impact on the aquifer by his home, which is approximately a mile away; however, he is concerned that they could have an adverse effect. He noted that a recent five-year study has revealed that this country is running out of good, clean, drinkable water; and he noted that resource must be protected. Mrs. Donna Dmmmtriadno, 147 Hitching Post Road, submitted to the Commission a copy of a petition containing the signatures of 759 residents of Gallatin County and the City of Bozeman stating opposition to the proposed High Ridge Estates and accompanying golf course. She noted that this petition was accompanied by 23 |ott=, requesting denial of the application or at least deferral of the decision; however, two or the three County `l-19-oo - zz - Commissivners voted for approval of the preliminary plat. She noted that in one neighbor- hood residents from 38 of the 45 homes signed the pctitk,n. She then distributed to the Commission n summary of the |wucrs submitted to the County Commission, as prepared by County Planner Mary Kay Peck. Mrs. Demetriades then requested Commission denial of this application. Mr. Milton 5cbap|ow adjacent property owner to the subject sitc, stated opposition to the development of High Ridge Estates because he (l) questions the need for another development of this type in the Gallatin Valley; (z) is concerned about the water supply; (a) has minor concern about possible pressure for public access to State lands because of this development; (4) is concerned about pmsa/b|n pollutants in Limestone Creak from use of herbicides and pesticides; and (s) is concerned about the potential elk problems. Mr. Gohap/mm briefly expanded on each of these points, noting there are several new deve|op- ments in the immediate vicinity of this proposed development; and he does not believe an- other subdivision of the same type is needed at this time. He then stated that he depends an Limestone Creek for his stock water for sO to 75 bead of cattle in a permanent pasture' on e year round basis. He noted that his property has a common boundary with the sub- ject property for a mile ai]nng his south property line and a half mile along his west boundary line. He stated that their well is 220 feet deep; and it produces barely enough water for domestic use. He then encouraged disapproval of this application. Ms. Jennifer 5mith, 2206 Highland Court' submitted a statement of opposition on behalf of the 250 members of the Madison/Gallatin Chapter of Trout Unlimited. She azar*d that the Board adopted a resolution of opposition for the proposed High Ridge Estates de- velopment because or potential damage to Limestone orcok. She noted that this stream provides a viable trout fishery; and Trout Unlimited believes that any fishery is worth saving. She then encouraged denial of this application. Mr. Lee Strqncek' u/o South Black Avenue, stated he is a landscape painter and' therefore, is anti-development. He then requested that the Commission deny this applica- tion and allow the open space to remain as it is. Mrs. Judy Wilkes, 9364 Nash Road, stated she is also an adjacent property owner to the subject parcel. She expressed concern about the potential location of roads through the development and the possible desire to extend the road system to Nash Road. She than noted therm are few supporters of this development outside those who are directly in- volved; and reminded the Commission that whether or not the public interest is being served is the grounds for dadsion-making. She noted that the subject development will have significant financial and environmental impacts on the community. She stated that this development will create the need for road improvements, sewer facilities, additional children for the school system, require additional police and fire protection impact the 11-10-oo - 23 _ water supply, impact the air quality and the impact on wUcUifu including the *|k uoor and bear. Mrs. Wilkes then submitted to the Commission a fetter of opposition, dated November 19 signed by she and her husband, which requests dcniaf of the application. She noted that more than four holes of an 18-bo|o golf course are involved when considering the im- pacts of this proposal. Mrs. Kay Moore, 8323 Nash Rnad, questioned the need for another golf course, not- ing this proposed course would be only two or three miles from Valley view c"|f Course. She highlighted other golf courses in the area, including Cottonwood Hills at Four Cor- ners, the course at Three Forks and the proposed golf course along McUhattao Road and Story Mill Road. She noted that fencing has been proposed on the golf course to hmwp the elk off the greens; however, she rioted in reality fences don't stop v/k. She then sug- gested that the project be revised to require City sewer or a central sewer system. Ms. Denise Hayman 120 Sourdough Ridge Road, requested that the City and Coun- ty take a comprehensive took at the entire area noting there are several subdivisions cur- rently under development. She noted there are already many unsold lots in that immediate area. She also encouraged that an environmental impact statement he required, reminding the Commission of the master plan goals of preserving the quality of the ridge, Mr. Jack Beckman, 78 Hitching Post Road noted there is a lot of planning taking place at the present time, but a review of the subject area reveals e mixture of big and Hu|e lots rather than any type of conformity. He then stated that oven though the op- pUcant's representatives have provided projections on the numbers and patterns of traffic from this proposed development, nobody can noa||y predict those items. He them stated that Sourdough Road is misdesigncd and violates many basic rules with its reverse curves and blind corners. He then noted there is pressure on the valley to develop; however, he expressed concern that such development could result in additional and undue financial im- pacts on other residents in that area, through additional assessments such as the creation of RlD's for road improvements. Ms. Elizabeth Parcels, 515 South Black Avenue, expressed concern about this pro- posal, questioning the impact that herbicides and chemicals used on both the go|r course and the private lawns may have on the ground water and the creek. Ms. Mary Jacobs stated she resides in Eagle Rock Reserve, and indicated concern for the elk. She suggested that a density of one house per twenty or forty acres would be much more appropriate for the subject area than the proposed density under this opp<i- catinn. She also expressed concern that with the topography of that area smoke from woouuornmg stoves tends to hang around the foothills, thus impacting the air quality. Mo. Jacobs expressed concern that with the amount of wealth that is being en- 71-19-90 - z* - courageu in this subdivision it might be accompanied by a r/=r in crime. She suggested that the developer should be required to provide a security system for the development, to deter the potential increase in crime and the type of cr|me. She also expressed concern that liquor will be sold at the clubhouse for the golf course; therefore, drunk drivers could be encountered on Sourdough Road. Break e'15 to 9:22 Mayor Hawks declared a break from 9:15 p.m. to 9:22 p.m., in accordance with Commission policy established at their regular meeting of March 14, 1983. Continued b/ic heari Ridge Estates of Montana - allow construction of a golf course on a portion of Section 32, T2S, R6E, MPM (east of Sourdough Road and one mile south of Gofdenstein Lane) consul- tant he is responsible to his client for ensuring that the project moves smoothly from ,tart to finish. He then stated the Commission should carefully consider whether the developer will carry through with the entire project, noting they should consider the community's best interests when making the decision on that issue. Mr- Arcen/n then noted that not only do vehicles use the roads in that area, but runners, joggers and bicyclists as well. He questioned whether the perceived need for bicycle trails and access to nature trails will increase the costs of development. Mr. Ben 8othnwer, 12 West Hayes Street, highlighted an a:rtic|e in the October 9. 1990 edition of USA L'Today, which indicates that the market for this proposed type of homes is declining because it has been overbuilt. He encouraged the Commission to care- fvo|y consider this issue, since additional golf course homes may not prove successful at this time. Mr. Tony Demetr/ados 147 Hitching Post Road noted several issues and concerns have been raised. He then noted that there are dry wells as well as marginal wells in this area questioning whether then: is adequate water to serve this proposed subdivision. He then noted that the water rights proposed for irrigation of the golf course may not he available, suggesting the Commission should carefully research that issue prior to its dpci- s|*n. He noted that Limestone Creek is mot a very large waterway; and he stated that those downstream amo|d feel they had incurred a property value loss if it were to dry up. He further noted that at the present time that stream is a viable trout fishery, questioning whether it is in the community's best interests to jeopardize that fishery for four holes of a golf course. Mr. Terry Schaplow summarized the opposition's position, noting that over a thou- sand Gallatin Valley residents have been represented by the testimony submitted. He then 71-19-oo - as - stated that during its meeting, the County Commissioner overlooked the fact that there are other buyers for the subject property who are willing to leave it as it in. He then reit- erated his encouragement for den/a| of this application. Mr. Rich Morse, Manager of Eagle Rock Reserve, stated he had been mmd*r the im- pression that a development of this scale would be required to utilize City water and sew- or, He then noted that in its approval of the preliminary plat for this project, the County placed a substantial amount of responsibility on the Scou,. He then stated that he hyn/s it is important to consider the cumulative effect of all of the subdivisions in the area when considering the various issues involved. Mr' Mike Lilly noted that a substantial amount of the testimony received has ad- dressed the subdivision as a who/e not the golf course. He reminded the Commission that the subdivision as o whole has been approved; and the issue before the Commission is the golf course only. He noted that with the conditions attached to County approval of the subdivision the applicant must satisfy those conditions prior to development. He noted that the testimony pertaining to traffic has included the entire subdivision not just the golf course, which will generate a relatively small amount of traffic over all hours of the day, Mr. Lilly then reminded the Commission that this application must be considered on its own merits and whether it meets the public interest criteria. He noted that the eco- nomic viability of this project is a concern of the developer's as well as residents in the area. He noted that if the project is viable, the community will benefit. He then en- couraged approval of this application. Mayor Hawks closed the continued public hearing. A decision will be forthcoming at next week's meeting. A djournment There being no further business to come before the Commission at this time, it was moved by Commissioner Frost seconded by Commissioner Swanson, that the meeting be ad- journed. The motion carried by the following Aye and No vote: those voting Ay* being Commissioner Frost Commissioner Swanson, Commissioner Knapp' Commissioner Gnehrumg and Mayor Hawks; those voting No, none. 11-ze-en