Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-05-12 Zoning Commission Minutes ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY,JUNE 5, 2012 ITEM 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ATTENDANCE Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and ordered the Recording Secretary to take attendance. Members Present: Randy Wall Trever McSpadden David Peck Erik Garberg City Commission Liaison: Members Absent: Nathan Minnick Staff Present: Tim McHarg, Planning Director Doug Riley, Associate Planner Tara Hastie, Recording Secretary Guests Present: Kevin Cook Don Cape, Jr. ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT {Limited to any public matter within the jurisdiction of the Zoning Commission and not scheduled on this agenda. Three-minute time limit per speaker.} Seeing there was no general public comment forthcoming, Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg closed this portion of the meeting. ITEM 3. MINUTES OF MAY 15, 2012 MOTION: Mr. Peck moved, Mr. Wall seconded, to approve the minutes of May 15, 2012 as presented. The motion carried 4-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg, Mr. Peck, Mr. McSpadden, and Mr. Wall. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 4. ELECTION OF OFFICERS MOTION: Mr. McSpadden moved to nominate Mr. Garberg as Chairperson, Mr. Peck seconded. Mr. Garberg accepted the nomination. The motion carried 4-0. Those voting aye Pagel of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes—June 5,2012 being Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg, Mr. Peck, Mr. McSpadden, and Mr. Wall. Those voting nay being none. MOTION: Mr. Garberg moved to nominate Mr. Wall as Vice Chairperson, Mr. Peck seconded. Mr. Wall accepted the nomination. The motion carried 4-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg, Mr. Peck, Mr. McSpadden, and Mr. Wall. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 5. PROJECT REVIEW 1. Zone Code Amendment Application#Z-12050—(North 19th Ave./West Oak Street PUD/ Master Site Plan) A Zone Code Amendment requested by Cape France Enterprises, 2020 Charlotte St., Bozeman, MT 59718, and Kevin Cook, 1276 N. 15th Ave., Ste. 103, Bozeman, MT 59715, requesting to amend the Bozeman Municipal Code/Unified Development Code and Design Objectives Plan to allow a Master Site Plan as an alternative to a Planned Unit Development for non-residential development within the North 19th Avenue/West Oak Street Entryway Corridor. (Riley) Associate Planner Doug Riley presented the Staff Report noting Staff had drafted the resolution and the ordinance text amendments for review by the Zoning Commission. He noted there had been an amendment adopted approximately a year ago that indicated the method by which a Master Site Plan would be reviewed and what allowances could be made with regard to phasing of the development of property. He stated the key to the current amendment would allow the Master Site Plan as an alternative to the PUD. He stated non-residential projects within the N. 19th Avenue and West Oak Street Entryway Corridors would be affected by the amendment and directed the Zoning Commission members to a map of the affected area. He stated the proposed amendment was supported by the N. 19th Ave./West Oak Street master plan language as well. He stated Staff had proposed a provision to allow two dimensional deviations as part of the Master Site Plan Application. He noted the amendment was also supported by the goals and objectives contained within the Growth Policy and the Economic Development Plan. He stated the project had been publicly noticed and had already been reviewed by the Development Review Committee and the Design Review Board. He stated he had included previous recommendations as well as the review criteria. He noted no public comment had been received to date. He noted Staff as well as the DRC and DRB had forwarded recommendations of approval to the City Commission. He stated he would be happy to answer any questions. Vice Chairperson Wall thanked Planner Riley for his Staff Report. He asked if an administrative decision was made, would a project still be required to be reviewed by DRB. Planner Riley responded that most would likely still trigger DRB review but there could be isolated instances where their review would not be required. Chairperson Garberg asked if the development occurred in phases would the approval be valid for a 25 year period. Planning Director McHarg responded that extensions would be granted with relation to future phases and each phase would have its own entitlements. Planner Riley added that the Development Review Committee would review all extension requests and forward a recommendation to the Planning Director. Page 2 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes—June 5,2012 Don Cape Jr., 2020 Charlotte Street, stated he was the owner of several properties along North 19th Avenue. He stated in the past there had been three or four landowners that owned sizeable pieces of land and at that point in time the PUD was probably appropriate to facilitate the development of the area. He stated now that the ordinance requirements were so detailed, PUD's that would take years to develop would require repeated reviews and application processes and become cumbersome given the length of time development would take and the number of times the approval would need to be revisited or amended. He stated they were living up to the standards as outlined in the PUD/Corridor requirements but would like the greater flexibility of the Master Plan process. He thanked the Zoning Commission for their and Planning Director McHarg's efforts in attaining a quorum for the meeting. Kevin Cook, 1276 N. 15th Ave, Ste. 103, stated the major concern was the timing as going before the City Commission was a time consuming process. He stated the amendment would allow projects to go through sooner and would lessen the length of time in the review process. He stated that even a slight modification to a PUD would have to be reviewed by the City Commission and suggested that the Master Site Plan process would allow a lesser review time and more flexibility in development. Chairperson Garberg opened the item for public comment. Seeing none forthcoming, he closed the public comment portion of the meeting. MOTION: Vice Chairperson Wall moved, Mr. Peck seconded, that having heard and considered public comment, the Zoning Commission hereby adopts the findings presented in the staff report and moves to forward a recommendation of approval of the text amendments to Chapter 38 as included in the draft Ordinance as requested in application Z-12050. Mr. McSpadden stated he loved the idea of a Master Site Plan in lieu of a Planned Unit Development and suggested it would be a policy shift. He asked if Staff had discussed formalization of the process with regard to the requirements of the Site Plan checklist items that would not be applicable to a Master Site Plan Application. He suggested revisiting the checklist items to remove those items that were not applicable. Planning Director McHarg responded Staff used their discretion with regard to the items necessary for review and agreed it would make sense to create a distinct Master Site Plan checklist. Mr. McSpadden stated he was a fan of the proposed change and suggested it would be an opportunity to effectively streamline the process using the checklist as a starting point. Planning Director McHarg responded that as Staff administered the Master Site Plan process, items would be identified to amend the submittal requirements of the code for individual applications. Vice Chairperson Wall stated he liked the direction the proposal was going and that it was enabled by the fact that a project had to meet certain criteria before it could be placed into the Master Site Plan classification. He added he liked the flexibility of the Master Site Plan process. He stated he was a fan of making things more streamlined and added his only concern was the amount of discretion and subjectivity from Staff. He stated he was supportive of the proposal as presented. Page 3 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes—June 5,2012 The motion carried 4-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg, Mr. Peck, Mr. McSpadden, and Vice Chairperson Wall. Those voting nay being none. MOTION: Vice Chairperson Wall moved, Mr. McSpadden seconded, that having heard and considered public comment, the Zoning Commission hereby adopts the findings presented in the staff report and moves to recommend approval of the text amendments to the Design Objectives Plan as included in the draft Resolution as requested in application Z-12050. Chairperson Garberg stated he found the application to be in keeping with the review criteria as outlined in the UDC and added he was supportive of the direction in which the process was going- Vice Chairperson Wall asked which safeguards there were to ensure that once a Master Site Plan was approved that certain things could not be accommodated on the site; would the review process default to a PUD or other type of review process. Planning Director McHarg responded the applicant would have to specifically request whichever type of relief they were seeking whether it was through the PUD process, Variance procedure, etc. Vice Chairperson Wall responded that it would come down to a Planning Director decision. He noted a number of applicants had asked for exceptions to the approved site layout and design guidelines. Planning Director McHarg responded the review authority could impose further conditions to forward a recommendation of approval, or could forward a recommendation of denial that the Planning Director would take into consideration. He added Planning Director decisions were appealable to the City Commission. Planner Riley added that the code included the City Commission's ability to always reclaim a project for their review. Mr. McSpadden added the discussion was of elemental components for approval of a project that was intended to provide flexibility to the developer. He stated the approval documents would run with the underlying larger project. He stated his concern was that those items should be included in the Master Site Plan process so there was a prescribed underlying use. Planning Director McHarg responded the members were discussion two separate layers of review for a Master Site Plan Application and the overall plan would be vaguer than individual site plans within the development. Mr. McSpadden stated his concern was consistency with regard to review of individual sites and that the Master Site Plan would be too vague. Planning Director McHarg responded that a huge scope of the Design Objectives Plan was addressing the individual neighborhoods/corridors as well as the site plans for specific sites and it would be beholden on Staff to make a finding of compliance with those guidelines; one of the major policy decisions was to provide more opportunity for administrative decisions. Vice Chairperson Wall stated what he really liked about it was that the applicant could decide on a Master Site Plan instead of a PUD in the interest of time, but it would be necessary for them to meet the requirements of the code instead of asking for exceptions through a PUD. He stated he was comfortable with deferring to the discretion of Staff and he thought it was great that they Page 4 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes—June 5,2012 were giving the applicant a choice. Planning Director McHarg responded that it was also incentivizing the applicant to comply with the City's adopted requirements. The motion carried 4-0. Those voting aye being Chairperson Pro Tem Garberg, Mr. Peck, Mr. McSpadden, and Vice Chairperson Wall. Those voting nay being none. ITEM 6. NEW BUSINESS No items were forthcoming. ITEM 7. ADJOURNMENT The Zoning Commission meeting was adjourned at 6:57 p.m. Erik Garberg, Chairperson Tim McHarg, Planning Director Zoning Commission Dept. of Planning & Community Development City of Bozeman City of Bozeman Page 5 of 5 Zoning Commission Minutes—June 5,2012