Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-03-12 Northeast Urban Renewal Board Minutes Northeast Urban Renewal Board (NURB) Regular Meeting Tuesday, January 3, 2012 The Northeast Urban Renewal Board met in regular meeting at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday, January 3, 2012, in the Conference Room, Professional Building, 20 East Olive Street, Bozeman, Montana. Present: Absent: Voting Members: Erik Nelson, Chair Daniel Doehring Tom Noble Robert Pavlic (arrived at 7:55 p.m.) Jeanne Wesley-Wiese Non-Voting Members: Commissioner Liaison: Carson Taylor Staff: Keri Thorpe, Assistant Planner Robin Sullivan, Recording Secretary Guests: Frank C'de Baca, 524 North Wallace Avenue Randy Wall, 530 East Cottonwood Street Call to Order— Chair Erik Nelson called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. Public Comment — Frank C'de Baca, 524 North Wallace Avenue, provided his input on the proposed restaurant in the Brown Building, located immediately across the street from his home. He noted that the concerns he voiced at this Board's October meeting remain, and presented again the letter that he had submitted at that meeting. He also presented a petition signed by residents along both North Wallace Avenue and East Peach Street within a block of the proposed restaurant. In addition, he submitted a letter from Julie Kleine and Aaron Mugaas expressing their concerns about the proposed restaurant. Frank C'de Baca stated that parking remains his main concern. He noted that the restaurant is proposed to open at 5 p.m. but the parking lot generally remains half full until 6 p.m. NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 1 because some of the businesses in the building remain open into the evening hours. He expressed concern that the result will be people being unable to park in the parking lot but spilling into the street, probably adjacent to his home and destroying his boulevard area since there are no curbs on that side of the street. He noted the most troubling is that Putter Brown is seeking deviations to allow a larger restaurant when the neighborhood concerns have not been met. Responding to Chair Nelson, Frank C'de Baca stated his first concern is that the restaurant is not right for the area, but will change its character. He cited the parking problems around Audrey's Pizza, which is located just a few blocks from the subject site. Tom Noble noted that residents in the district are not supportive of restaurants in the area. He stated they trade their noisy days for quiet nights; and they don't want that standard to be compromised. Frank C'de Baca stated he has lived in his home for 22 years. He noted that at the present time, the neighborhood becomes quiet and pleasant after 6 p.m. on weeknights and on the weekends; and that peace and tranquility will be lost forever if a restaurant is allowed. Planner Keri Thorpe stated this application goes before the Board of Adjustment next Tuesday. Responding to Frank C'de Baca, Chair Nelson confirmed that he should attend the meeting and voice his concerns. He noted that, while this Board may choose to submit its comments, the Board of Adjustment has the final decision. Frank C'de Baca observed that, if one person gets hurt, the whole neighborhood gets hurt. Jeanne Wesley-Wiese encouraged Frank to get others to attend the meeting as well, noting that testimony is better that signatures on a petition. Chair Nelson stated it is important to consider the owner's property rights and to balance expectations. He noted that in this instance, the applicant is seeking a deviation to increase the size of the restaurant by 22 percent. Responding to Frank C'de Baca, Commissioner Liaison Taylor suggested he can put a sign on his lawn asking that no one park on the street adjacent to his property. Frank C'de Baca stated all he wants is peace and quiet. He noted that things are changing in the area, and he does not want to see any more change. He concluded by asking if Board members would want a restaurant across the street from their homes. NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 2 Chair Nelson emphasized the importance of providing input to the governing board since that input can result in providing mitigation for those concerns. Planner Thorpe stated that staff is recommending the hours of operation be recorded at the Clerk and Recorder's Office so that the proposed business or any new business in this location is limited to those hours of operation. Consent Items — Approve minutes from December 6, 2011 meeting. It was moved by Tom Noble, seconded by Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, that the minutes be approved as submitted. The motion carried on a 4-0 vote. Discussion Items — Brewery Wall Discussion — How will NURB participate in the preservation of the wall? Planner Keri Thorpe distributed a memo identifying what this Board is allowed to do along with some ideas for offsetting the costs of stabilizing the wall. Responding to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, Planner Thorpe confirmed that the Board's desire to preserve historic properties does provide for some ties to the district plan and noted that her memo includes some examples of how that tie may be made. She cautioned that just approving stabilization of the wall won't improve the property, but suggested that offering an incentive or a cost offset so that the owner can successfully market the property to allow for its improvement. She noted that preservation of the wall could be tied to a project; or monies could be used to offset some of the costs of improvements to East Tamarack Street and East Aspen Street in an amount up to the difference in costs between demolition and stabilization of the wall in the form of a refund once the improvements have been completed. She concluded by noting that a low-interest loan could be offered, particularly since the term of the loan may extend beyond the life of the tax increment financing district. She cautioned that the district plan currently avoids spending monies on private projects; rather, it simply allows for studies of private properties. She offered to revisit the minutes for creation of the district if the Board wishes, noting that the expenditure of monies on private properties would first require amending of the district plan. Chair Nelson noted the committee that worked on creation of this district was supportive of historic preservation but, based on all of the concern about the blight designation and lawsuits that occurred at the Supreme Court level, the committee determined the monies should only be spent on public infrastructure. He concluded by stating he is not willing to offer the owner monies to stabilize the wall but would be willing to consider other alternatives to help address public costs of the project. NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 3 Chair Nelson noted that offering to offset costs in an effort to attract a new buyer would work only if someone comes forward in the next year with a project; however, amending the plan would give the Board the latitude to offer low-interest loans for preservation of not only to this property but for other historic properties within the district, such as the depot. Responding to Chair Nelson, Planner Thorpe confirmed that stabilization of a "relic" such as this wall would typically be part of a much larger project that involves multiple parcels and structures. She noted that the wall could possibly be stabilized as a climbing wall or as a focal point for a project that utilizes the remainder of the property. Jeanne Wesley-Wiese stated she has always envisioned the wall would be incorporated into a new building rather than remain as a freestanding entity. Chair Nelson suggested that the Board approach the property owner with an offer to offset some of the off-site infrastructure costs while, at the same time, proceeding with an amendment to the plan to allow for low-interest loans for historic preservation projects. He noted that if the Board writes a letter and, particularly if it gets a response, it could better understand the property owner's intent for this property. Responding to Chair Nelson, Planner Thorpe suggested that the proposed amendment to the plan include acceptance of applications for historic preservation or a revitalization plan for historic preservation that could be adopted by resolution. Responding to Planner Thorpe, Chair Nelson asked that she draft a letter to the property owner and distribute it to the Board for review and comment. He asked that she also begin the process for amending the district plan. The Board concurred in the Chair's proposed steps. City Commission 2012 Work Plan — Is there a recommendation the NURB would like to forward to the City Commission? Board members identified the following list of items: demolition by neglect ordinance and property maintenance code; approaching the Montana Department of Transportation to move the North Rouse Avenue project up on its priority list; enhancing the Bozeman Creek corridor; and infill development policy/standards for the district. Planner Thorpe noted the North 7t" Avenue Urban Renewal Board is looking at the possibility of a zoning district for their TIF district that recognizes existing conditions and alleviates the requirement to seek deviations due to those conditions. Tom Noble suggested that a city-wide infill policy would be good, rather than adopting policies that target specific urban renewal districts. NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 4 Chair Nelson suggested that if a property owner proposes something that has less impact that what currently exists, there should be some incentives such as possibly impact fee credits. Responding to Chair Nelson, the Board members agreed with the list of work plan items listed above. Brown Building Restaurant Proposal. Responding to Chair Nelson, Planner Keri Thorpe stated she notified Putter Brown that this item was listed on the agenda and invited him to attend the meeting, but he is not present. Planner Thorpe stated the only deviation the applicant seeking is to the size of the restaurant. Since parking must be provided for other tenants in the building open past 5 p.m., she has proposed a condition of approval that would limit the square footage of the seating area in the restaurant. She noted that the conditions of approval are to be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder and, if a new restaurant were to move into this location, it would be required to comply with those conditions. She stated the conditions recommended by staff include the limitation on the seating area as well as a closing time of 9 p.m. She concluded by noting that, while Damasco's has been the restaurant previously discussed for this location, the application does not specify it in the application. Planner Thorpe noted that Putter Brown has indicated employees will arrive at 4 p.m. and the restaurant will open at 5 p.m. The doors of the restaurant will close at 9 p.m. but employees will probably not be done with their work until around 11 p.m. Responding to Tom Noble, Planner Thorpe confirmed that the requested deviation is for just over 300 square feet. She noted that several of the neighbors to this site have indicated patrons could use their parking spaces at night. She observed that Audrey's Pizza met their minimum number of parking spaces, but recognized that the success of a business can trigger the need for more spaces. Responding to questions from Randy Wall, Planner Thorpe confirmed that a deviation was granted when the building was originally constructed, to reduce the number of parking spaces from 26 to 19. She has driven by the site and found at least seven spaces open and, as a result, is recommending that the initial deviation be honored. Responding to Dan Doehring, Planner Keri Thorpe stated that an agreement for additional parking spaces is not needed under the recommended conditions of approval since an adequate number of spaces are available on site. Responding to Chair Nelson, the Planner confirmed that the conditions for the cabaret license for Audrey's Pizza were filed with the Clerk and Recorder. She then noted that if a NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 5 use creates a nuisance, they must mitigate it; and that could cover the issue of smell that was previously raised. Chair Nelson stated that, with the recommended limitation on the seating area, he doesn't see any problem with the requested deviation. He then voiced concern that the applicant is not present to provide input on why the additional 300 square feet is needed, but he suspects that space may be needed in the kitchen. Responding to comments from Randy Wall, Planner Thorpe stated the applicant is proposing to divide the space in half by putting a wall down the middle of the building, with two separate entrances and a hallway between the spaces. Randy Wall voiced his concern that the main entrance for the restaurant is on the north, which is closest to his house and bedroom. He suspects that the noisiest people will be the employees as they leave work for the night, particularly since that noise will travel directly to his bedroom. He then questioned why the restaurant cannot be limited to 1500 square feet since the dividing wall is not yet constructed. Chair Nelson noted that the applicant is adding a vestibule to provide an inside area for patrons waiting to be seated. Randy Wall noted that the intent of the historic mixed use district is to provide various services for the area, which he feels would include a small restaurant serving breakfast and lunch since businesses are closed in the evenings. He noted this is very different from an evening restaurant that attracts people from both inside and outside the district. He then voiced concern that providing a vestibule for people to wait will result in the need for additional parking, which could negatively impact the neighborhood. Randy Wall stated he has read Frank C'de Baca's letter, and he agrees with many of those concerns. He noted that at 5 p.m., the neighborhood goes quiet and is very quiet on weekends. He questioned whether the proposed restaurant is consistent with the intent of the historic mixed use district. He then stated that, while he does not object to a restaurant, he does object to loud talking in a parking lot behind his house. Responding to Chair Nelson, Bob Pavlic stated he does not want the restaurant in this neighborhood, noting that once one is allowed, others could follow. Randy Wall questioned how the City will enforce conditions which limit the number of seats allowed or the square footage dedicated to seating. Chair Nelson noted that the Building Division will review the plans to ensure they comply with the conditions of approval. He then stated he feels this Board should weigh in on this NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 6 application, noting he has not been convinced that the deviation would be adverse. Tom Noble recognized the applicant has the right to open a restaurant in the subject location. He does not, however, support the requested deviation, particularly since the applicant is not present to tell the Board why it is needed. Randy Wall noted he would like to see a discussion on whether property owners in the neighborhood feel an evening use is appropriate in a historic mixed use district. He expressed concern that this business could change incrementally, with the sale of alcohol in the restaurant being the next step. Tom Noble voiced his support for discussing whether an evening use is appropriate, noting that it has been discussed in other situations, such as Bronken's. Responding to Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, Planner Thorpe cautioned that we don't normally use zoning to restrict hours of uses but rather rely on other ordinances, such as a noise ordinance, to mitigate such concerns. Jeanne Wesley-Wiese expressed concern that, under the previous code, if a residential use were located adjacent to an M-1 use, the more restrictive standards applied; however, the least restrictive standards now apply. Planner Thorpe reminded the Board that the underlying land use designation in the growth policy for this area is industrial. Chair Nelson reminded the Board that under the zone code, a restaurant is allowed on the subject property, noting that he does not have a problem with the requested deviation. It was moved by Tom Noble, seconded by Dan Doehring, that the Board recommend the deviation not be supported. The motion carried on a 4-1 vote with Bob Pavlic voting No. It was moved by Bob Pavlic, seconded by Jeanne Wesley-Wiese, that the Board not support the application for an evening use restaurant in the district. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote with Tom Noble abstaining. Neighborhood News. Planner Keri Thorpe reported that the legal department has now identified the process to be followed in adopting the design for the East Peach Street improvements, and that process does not allow the design to be on the February 6 Commission agenda. She stated that the engineering design should be submitted to the Planning Department within the next day or two so the process can begin. NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 7 Adjournment — 9:01 p.m. There being no further business to come before the Board at this time, Chair Nelson adjourned the meeting. Erik Nelson, Chair Northeast Urban Renewal Board City of Bozeman NURB Meeting—January 3, 2012 8