HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-25-1997 DRC Minutes DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
TUESDAY,MARCH 25, 1997
Members Present: Larry Woodward, Dave Skelton,Neil Poulsen, Phill Forbes, Craig Brawner,
Chuck Winn
Staff Present: Jody Olsen, Chris Saunders, James Nicholson, Carol Schott
Visitors Present: Sid Gustafson, Joan Rudberg, Tom Milleson, Jerry Taylor, Todd Smith, Terry
Thrielkeld, Taylor Pierson, Lowell Springer
Chairperson Dave Skelton called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. City Engineer Craig Brawner
introduced James Nicholson, Project Engineer,to the DRC.
A. FINAL WEEK REVIEW
1. Bozeman Vet Clinic CUP#Z-9717 - (Olsen)
918 South Church Avenue
- A Conditional Use Permit Application to allow an existing single family
residence to be converted for use as an outpatient veterinary clinic.
Lowell Springer and Sid Gustafson joined DRC. Chairperson Skelton introduced the project and
noted that a formal recommendation is to be made to the Planning Board and City Commission.
Planner Jody Olsen reviewed the Planning Department's conditions. Condition#10 was discussed
and Chairperson Skelton suggested adding the statement, "subject to the review and approval of
the Planning Office".
Mr. Springer asked that if the applicant has five parking stalls, would Staff be receptive to a one-
way in, one-way out drive. Chairperson Skelton noted that the City doesn't generally like one-
ways, however, it is subject to the review of the Public Works and Engineering Departments.
City Engineer Craig Brawner noted that he wouldn't have a problem with the one-way driving
aisle as long as it is properly signed. He continued that the one-way driving aisle would also
increase the curbing and paving requirements.
Mr. Springer noted that the applicant would offer the City the right to buy the right-of-way rather
than dedicating it to the City. Public Services Director Phill Forbes noted that the City would not
be interested. Chairperson Skelton noted that though the applicant can propose that the City
purchase the right-of-way, this Staff would have problems supporting the proposal. Discussion of
the proposal followed.
Mr. Springer asked to negotiate the heights of the ceilings of the existing structure. He noted that
he didn't find a reference to ceiling heights for commercial uses. Since there are no requirements,
can require a certain height for this building. Chief Building Official Neil Poulsen noted that he
would need to research the ceiling height requirements.
Planner Olsen inquired about a Waiver of Right to Protest SID's for improvements to South
Church Avenue. The consensus was that it would be appropriate.
Development Review Committee-March 25,1997 1
Fire Marshal Chuck Winn noted that since it is an existing structure,there wouldn't be a
requirement for a water supply for fire protection. He continued that if they were to increase the
size of the structure,the applicant would be required to install the water infrastructure.
Discussion ensued on what would trigger the need for fire hydrants.
Mr. Springer noted that a person would never be farther than 8' from a door anywhere inside the
structure.
Chairperson Skelton inquired if they planned to have an outside holding area. Mr. Gustafson
noted that the area next to the garage would be available. It was noted that the holding area
should be shown on the FSP.
Mr. Forbes noted that the whole area is in need of waivers for sewer and water improvements.
Mr. Brawner noted that there will be signage requirements for one-way ingress and egress, for
waivers for water and sewer and roadway improvements to have been recorded at the Clerk and
Recorders Office, and for storm drainage and grading plans to be included on the Final Site Plan.
He continued that paving and curb and gutter details will also be required on the FSP.
Mr. Springer noted that because the zoning is RS, the applicant was hoping to not be required to
curb and gutter.
MOTION: Mr. Brawner moved to recommend conditional approval of the application to the
Planning Board and City Commission, including the conditions discussed today. Mr. Winn
seconded the motion. During discussion, Mr. Springer asked for clarification of the conditions.
Planner Olsen explained the change to condition#4. The motion carried 6 - 0.
Mr. Forbes noted that the second access will be inspected in the field for compliance with City
standards.
Mr. Gustafson asked for clarification on drive access width. Planner Olsen noted it would have to
meet code.
B. SECOND WEEK REVIEWS
1. Hound City Cafe MiSP/DOA/Dev#Z-9723 - (Olsen)
719 W. Mendenhall
- A Minor Site Plan and a Certificate of Appropriateness with Deviations to
allow the conversion of a residential use to a restaurant use.
Chairperson Skelton introduced the project. He noted that a decision will be made next week by
this board on the MiSP/COA and a recommendation made to City Commission on the deviation.
Todd Smith joined DRC. Planner Jody Olsen reviewed the application.
Water/Sewer Superintendent Larry Woodward inquired if Mr. Smith had been approached by the
owners of Dairy Queen about paving the alley between them. Mr. Smith noted that they have
approached him,however, they wish for him to pay for it. He continued that the Dairy Queen
Development Review Committee-March 25,1997 2
owners aren't interested in getting the easement across his property -they say that issue is
between him and the City. He noted that he is open to granting the easement. Mr. Woodward
noted that if he doesn't grant the easement, the City will install the sewer line in the boulevard in
the front of his property by the second week in April. Mr. Smith noted that he would rather have
the easement in his back yard than have the boulevard excavated to install the sewer line. He
continued that he planned to ask Dairy Queen,AAA, and the City to participate in the paving of
the alley.
Discussion ensued on dealing with the sewer easement above and beyond the MiSP application.
Planner Olsen noted that a condition will be added that the alley will be paved prior to occupancy.
Discussion followed on the cost of paving the alley.
City Engineer Craig Brawner noted that the parking stalls have to be dimensioned on the FSP.
Chairperson Skelton inquired if there was a problem with the van accessible parking stall. Mr.
Smith noted that he didn't know that the minimum width was 16' and chose to draw it only 13'
wide. He will correct that error.
Discussion followed on the location of the sign in the vision triangle.
Mr. Woodward noted that a back flow prevention valve will have to be installed as well as a
grease trap.
Chairperson Skelton noted that DRC members will have conditions for recommending approval at
next week's meeting.
C. FIRST WEEK REVIEW
1. North Meadows MaSub Preliminary Plat#P-9715 - (Saunders)
South of Durston Road, West of Hunter's Way
A Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application to allow the subdivision
of 7.272 acres into 3 lots for residential use and 1 lot for offices.
Taylor Pierson joined DRC. Planner Chris Saunders explained the application. He noted that
there had been a request for a road on the back side of the properly from a member of the public.
He asked the DRC to consider the need for a road easement on the western edge of the property.
Chairperson Skelton noted that the City needs to do a transportation plan for this area to put
developers on notice as to which streets will be required.
Planner Saunders inquired if anyone had concerns about piping the ditch in a public right-of-way
if the western edge road is desirable. Chairperson Skelton noted that if done, the City is not
responsible for the maintenance of the pipe. Public Service Director Phill Forbes asked for
clarification on the moving of the ditch. Planner Saunders noted that the applicant plans to move
it to the west property line and pipe it. Discussion ensued on the piping of the ditch. Chairperson
Skelton noted that if FWP doesn't recognize it as a stream/ditch,then it is a ditch.
Mr. Taylor asked about the size of the water services to these lots. Mr. Woodward noted that the
Development Review Committee-March 25,1997 3
City would be opposed to the meter pits suggested in this application. He noted that there were
more streets proposed in Phase I than are shown in Phase II. City Engineer Craig Brawner noted
that the Phase II preliminary plat doesn't depict utilities. Discussion ensued on what was depicted
on phase I preliminary plat plans and what is shown on phase II.
Mr. Taylor noted that there would have been a long dead end line at the end of Durston without a
loop, which is one change from phase I. He noted that they were trying to remedy the long dead
ends on Durston and Villard by looping the lines.
Chairperson Skelton noted that this is a typical scenario of what happens. Phase I isn't complete
and Staff doesn't know how phase II will tie in to it.
Mr. Brawner noted that there may be a need for water/sewer extensions. Chairperson Skelton
noted that if the City departments can't make a decision on a project,then the project will be
returned to the applicant for further materials to be supplied. Chairperson Skelton noted that
phases I and II should have been reviewed together.
Mr. Forbes clarified that there have been significant changes in phase I. Mr. Woodward
concurred. Chairperson Skelton asked if the relocation of the infrastructure will affect the size of
the lots. Planner Saunders noted that the rights-of-way have not changed and some unnecessary
details have been omitted to lessen the confusion.
Mr. Woodward and Mr. Brawner noted that the changes that have been made in phase I have
been improvements over what was submitted, however, they were changed without approvals.
Discussion ensued on the need for fire hydrants and on the requirement that the access to
manholes must be graveled roadways in the least.
Mr. Taylor asked if Villard is West Villard or just plain Villard. Consensus was that it is just plain
Villard.
Planner Saunders noted that two street-cut requests have been submitted with this application,
however, both streets are under the 7-year moratorium. If allowed,he asked what street
restoration would be required. Discussion followed on the street restoration requirements,
location of water/sewer mains, and location of manholes.
D. INFORMAL REVIEW
1. Bozeman Personal Care#1-9716 - (Olsen)
Unfinished portion of Oak Street just east of the Gallatin County Rest Home
- An Informal Review to provide the applicant information on the proposal.
Summary of meeting notes.
Tom Milleson, Jerry Taylor, and Terry Thrielkeld joined DRC. Planner Jody Olsen noted that this
informal was continued from last week as most of City Staff was unable to attend that meeting.
She explained the application. Mr. Taylor presented an aerial photo of the project. Planner Olsen
noted that the larger issue is the infrastructure. Discussion followed on when the extension of
Development Review Committee-March 25,1997 4
Juniper will be completed and the access to the lot being from Oak Street. Chairperson Skelton
noted that Juniper will be a minor collector between Durston and Oak, and Mr. Forbes discussed
the street situation in that area. Discussion followed on the dedication of streets and the
necessary easements for water and sewer.
Fire Marshall Chuck Winn commented on fire protection access. Mr.Milleson inquired if the Fire
Department required access to the hydrant, and if so,was the access required to be paved. Mr.
Winn noted that they do need access over a plowable surface,not necessarily paved with asphalt,
that is maintained by the applicants.
Mr. Brawner noted that this is in truth a subdivision submittal not a site plan and the key issues
are subdivision issues.
Discussion followed on the orientation of the building on the site and the reasons for not
constructing the facility nearer to Oak Street. Mr. Brawner noted that a second access may be
required. Mr. Taylor inquired what would happen if they didn't subdivide. Chairperson Skelton
noted that they would be required to submit recorded easements and install a private driveway
with curb, gutter, and sidewalks.
Discussion followed on street width requirements,problems with water, and fire hydrant
requirements.
MOTION: Mr. Winn moved, Mr. Woodward seconded,that the meeting be adjourned. Motion
carried 6- 0.
Development Review Committee-March 25,1997 5