HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-05-16 CC Mtg - A5. UDC Infill Policy Framework Discussion
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner Martin Matsen, Director of Community Development
SUBJECT: Unified Development Code update infill policy framework presentation,
discussion and direction.
MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action – UDC Discussion and Direction
RECOMMENDATION: As determined by the Commission
The purpose of this presentation and discussion is to summarize a number of infill
alternatives/options, with illustrations, to generate comment and discussion from the City
Commission. Staff will present a series of code amendment alternatives/options with policy
questions to the Commission to solicit preferred direction on these larger issues as they relate to the scope of work for the UDC update. Based on feedback and direction from the Commission,
staff will re-evaluate current concepts and options and draft the remaining UDC amendments for
advisory boards and committees to forward recommendations to the City Commission for review
and possible adoption.
The City of Bozeman has and is experiencing considerable development and it is clear the
existing development code functions. The UDC re-write intends to improve the general function
and ease of use of the document and integrate thoughtful and appropriate amendments to further
the community’s desired built environment while respecting the context in which development
occurs.
Any proposed options must be evaluated on numerous variables and achieve measurable positive
outcomes. These variables include maintaining the character of the community, provide a
variety of housing types and affordability, balance costs, maintain a transparent and predicable
review process, and, in general, further the goals and objectives of the Bozeman Community Plan (the community’s priorities).
In preparation for this discussion, on November 7, 2016, staff prepared a Unified Development
Code update progress report and infill policy framework memo. The memo can be reviewed
HERE.
Staff and Makers Architecture and Urban Design (consultant) will present a detailed summary of
issues and possible alternatives for the Commission to consider. The presentation will cover the
following general subjects and will include possible amendments alternatives:
210
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)
Block Frontage concept applied throughout City to eliminate the need for Entryway
Corridors overlay to insure adequate design considerations
Large site (2 acres and larger, for example) residential development; incorporate density Averaging, incorporate density bonuses in exchange for public benefit such as affordable
housing, energy efficiency, and/or greater integration of trials.
Highlight the “Complete list of changes” document
Residential zoning district dimensional standards to promote infill and greater variety of
housing types and affordability
Transitions between zones and general adjacency issues
Harmonizing definitions, code references, and other details listed in the Complete List of
Changes document
General Outline & Primary Commission Query:
1. Should the existing design standards in the Design Objectives Plan (DOP) be placed in the
UDC and apply to all properties outside of the NCOD and downtown core? See Section
38.19.100.4, BMC. The design standards within the DOP when created were the best
practice for development outside of the NCOD and downtown core. Currently, the design standards found in the DOP only apply to areas within the Entryway Corridor overlay. For example, the adoption of the Midtown B-2M zoning district removed the Entryway Corridor
and integrated the design requirements into the base zoning code. Further amendments are
required to fully eliminate the need for the DOP. The intent of such a change is to improve
transparency, communicate expectations, reduce redundancy, and create more consistency in applying design requirements.
2. Should the City apply the Block Frontage system throughout the City? The purpose and
objective of expanding the system beyond the B-2M District is to eliminate the need for
Entryway Corridor overlay district and to integrate the primary design requirements from the
DOP. Similar to the plan review criteria question above, the intent and purpose is to improve transparency, communicate expectations, reduce redundancy, create more consistency in applying design requirements, and create a more predictable development environment.
The Block Frontage system was presented and discussed during the adoption of the Midtown
Zoning efforts (Storefront Studio), the February 9, 2016 public workshop, and the March 29,
2016 City wide code update workshop.
3. Should the City augment existing code provisions to generally increase allowable density in residential zoning districts? There are numerous provisions in the UDC to allow variable
sized subdivision lots, multi-household buildings, accessory dwellings units, mixed use
buildings that include a residential component, special zoning district and processes in place
to accommodate unique topographical and environmental constraints as well as systems in place to allow greater development creativity (Planned Unit Development). With the current regulations, Bozeman continues to develop at a relatively low density, approximately 5.5
dwelling units per gross acre.
The Bozeman Community Plan establishes expected densities of 6 – 32 dwellings units (DU)
per net acre in residential districts. Specific zoning districts state minimum densities at five (5) DU per net acre in the R-S through R-3 and RMH districts and a minimum of eight (8) DU per net ace in the R-4 districts. The newly created R-5 district requires a minimum
density of eight (8) DU per gross acre.
To illustrate density we provided data culled from a sample density assessment of a number
of areas with the jurisdictional boundaries of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
211
District (NCOD) in anticipation of the NCOD evaluation. The sample area map and results
are attached to this memo for reference.
Possible changes/modifications to the existing development code include:
a. Decrease the minimum lot size from 5,000 square feet to 4,000 square feet or less for detached single-household dwellings, and reducing lot size requirements for other
housing types such as townhouses and multi-household buildings. If a small lot is
desired by a developer, limits on the building size could and should be required. Limits
can be achieved by including reduced height (two stories), floor area ratio, or a
combination.
b. Decrease minimum lot size to accommodate Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) from
6,000 sq/ft to 5,000 sq/ft.
c. Allow ADU’s on the ground floor. Specific design and site conditions would apply such
as the requirement of an alley, building height limit, square footage limit, etc.
d. Require residential subdivisions over two acres to include variable sized lots with a lot size average system to promote housing variety within a neighborhood as required by the
housing goals and objectives 6.3 of the Bozeman Community Plan.
e. Reduce minimum lot size requirement for duplexes from 6,000 sq/ft to 5,000 sq/ft.
Changes to lot size standards may require changes to the existing yard, lot coverage, and
related development standards. And/or make minor adjustments to parking requirements to create a viable housing option.
4. Adopt specific standards to mitigate transitions between districts and general adjacency
issues. Numerous approaches have been considered and are employed in other jurisdictions.
These include:
a. The City adopted height and slope relationship criteria with the revisions of chapter 4-B of the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the Neighborhood Conservation
Overlay District.
b. Develop standards that require a height transition within a certain distance of a residential
zone, such as a maximum height allowed within 50 feet of a residential zone equal to
150% the height of the residential zone, see example below.
c. Set a maximum height for any building within a mixed zone block of 45 feet (4 stories).
d. Set more rigid transition zone that increase every 25 feet from a residential zone, see
example below.
e. Consider transition requirements that are more stringent next to a historic district.
212
City of Portland, Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, Scale and Transitions Issues,
August 13, 2013.
* The Block Frontage System can and will integrate transition issues of architectural
detailing, buffers, and other considers
ALTERNATIVES: As identified by the Commission
Attachments: Density Review Map, Lot Averages per Block Presentation will be provided prior to meeting date Report compiled on: November 30, 2016
213
Appendix A – Public Outreach, Meetings, and Open House Events
Include public outreach and events and meetings to date. Other ongoing efforts are scheduled including outreach to the Gallatin Association of Realtors (GAR) and the Southwest Montana
Building Industry Association (SWIMBIA). The current CEO of the GAR, Steve Candler and
the Executive Director of SWIMBIA, Linda Revenaugh, sit on the UDC Advisory Committee.
# Date Event Name General Subject
1 7/10/15 David Fine Midtown discussion
2 7/13/15 David Fine Consultant Update
3 7/13/15 Tom Londe Share Point set up
4 7/14/15 David Fine TIF Board Meeting
5 8/17/15 City Commission CC Special Presentation
6 8/24/15 City Commission CC PSA Adoption Hearing
7 9/3/15 BZN Climate Partners presentation
8 9/10/15 City Wide Kickoff City wide kick-off in Commission Room
9 11/5/15 NSURB Board Meeting
10 11/9/15 City Commission Presentation for Studio
11/9/15 Advisory Committee Meeting
11
Nov 15-
19/15 Studio Storefront
12 11/9/15 Midtown Workshop
13 11/11/15 City Wide Workshop
14 11/18/15 Downtown Bus Improvement Board Project Update
15 11/23/15 City Commission Summary of Studio
16 12/3/15 NSURB Board Meeting
17 12/15/16 Advisory Committee Meeting Block frontage concepts
18 1/7/16 NSURB Board Meeting
Zoning district boundaries, zoning
classification options
19 1/12/16 Advisory Committee Meeting
Zoning district boundaries, zoning
classification options
20 2/4/2016 NSURB Board Meeting
21 2/9/16 Advisory Committee Meeting Midtown Code - MAKERS
22 2/8/2016 City Commission Midtown Workshop Special
23 2/9/2016 Advisory Committee Meeting Midtown Code
24 2/9/16 Midtown Workshop Development Code Draft
25 3/22/16 Advisory Committee Meeting Midtown code/map, admin
26 3/22/16 ZC & PB Work Session Midtown code/map, admin
27 3/28/16 City Commission Work Session Midtown code/map, admin
28 3/29/16 City Wide Open House City Wide Phase 2 Public Meeting
29 3/29/16 MURB meeting Discussion on program
30 4/5/16 ZC & PB Public Meeting Ordinance adoption
31 4/7/16 MURB meeting
32 4/11/16 City Commission Adoption Hearing Continue to April 25
214
33 4/25/16 City Commission Adoption Hearing Adoption night
34 5/2/16 City Commission Adoption Hearing Revised Midtown code adoption
35 5/10/16 Advisory Committee Meeting Cottage house, Phase 2 plan, more
36 6/14/16 Advisory Committee Meeting Format & process
38 6/27/16 City Commission Layout & process
39 7/12/16 UDC Advisory Committee DOP & Block Frontage
40 8/2/16 Zoning Commish & Planning Board UDC Design & Adoption Plan
41 8/9/16 UDC Advisory Committee Parks & Historic, water policy
42 8/15/16 City Commission DOP & UDC update/coordination
43 10/4/16 Zoning Commish & Planning Board
Subdivision processes, LOS, Cash for
intersections, covenants
44 10/18/16 Zoning Commish & Planning Board Miscellaneous corrections
45 10/24/16 City Commission
Covenants, Sub process, cash for
infrastructure. LOS
46 11/1/16 Zoning Commish & Planning Board Water 1, Misc corrections
47 11/1/16 UDC Advisory Committee Water adequacy, ADU and infill
48 11/7/16 City Commission UDC update status report
49 11/10/16 INC Outreach Infill & ADU discussion
50 11/21/2016 City Commission Water 1, Misc corrections
51 12/5/16 City Commission Infill policy discussion
215
W OAK ST
W MAIN ST
W KOCH ST
W COLLEGE ST S 19TH AVE S 11TH AVE S 3RD AVE S 4TH AVE S 5TH AVE E MAIN ST
DURSTON RD S 6TH AVE N 7TH AVE S GRAND AVE N 15TH AVE N 19TH AVE S CHURCH AVE IN
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E 90 H
WY S WILLSON AVE W STORY ST L ST N ROUSE AVE N 5TH AVE BOHART LN S 8TH AVE S 15TH AVE N 17TH AVE CEDAR ST S TRACY AVE W OLIVE ST
ELLI S S T
W BEALL ST
W ALDERSON ST
W CURTISS ST S 9TH AVE W GRANT ST
W LAMME ST N BLACK AVE W GARFIELD ST S 10TH AVE W VILLARD ST N TRACY AVE N GRAND AVE IDA AVE E LAMME ST S BLACK AVE FRONT ST
W BABCOCK ST S 20TH AVE N WALLACE AVE W HARRISON ST
W LINCOLN ST S 23RD AVE N 20TH AVE PLUM AVE N 9TH AVE N BOZEMAN AVE N 3RD AVE N 22ND A VE S ROUSE AVE N 10TH AVE N 11TH AVE W MENDENHALL ST N CHURCH AVE W PEACH ST S 14TH AVE N WILLSON AVE E MENDENHALL ST
H
A
G
G
E
RTY LN
E OAK ST HI
GHL
A
ND BLVD
ANNIE ST
E STORY ST N BROADWAY AVE W TAMARACK ST KENYON DR N MONTANA AVE HOLLY DR PERKINS PL N 14TH AVE N 24TH AVE S 7TH AVE A S H D R N 21ST AVE N 12TH AVE N 18TH AVE N 16TH AVE N 23RD AVE E BEALL ST
JUNIPER ST POST DR S BOZEMAN AVE S MONTANA AVE BUTTONWOOD AVE E CU R T I S S ST S WALLACE AVE PEA
R ST CYPRESS AVE S 1
2
T
H AVE REMINGTON WAY
V ILLAGE DOWNTOWN BLVD LINDLEY PL ICE POND R D
HEMLOCK ST FOX CT S 16TH AVE CARSON PL E ASPEN ST
E BABCOCK ST S 13TH AVE E MASON ST TAI LN MAE ST
W MASON ST BRADY AVE S 18TH AVE W CLEVELAND ST N 7TH AVE S BOZEMAN AVE N 19TH AVE W BEALL ST S 12TH AVE E
M
AIN ST
I
N
T
E
R
S
T
A
T
E
9
0 HWY HIGHLAND BLVD S BLACK AVE
W BABCOCK ST S 7TH AVE S 8TH AVE E ASPEN ST
LegendOld Town BlocksConservation OverlayCity Limits
Density ReviewJune 2012
Revised:
This map was created by theCity of BozemanDepartment of Planningand Community Development
¯
1 inch = 1,077 feet
Intended for Planning purposes onlysome layers may not line up properly.
216
OLD TOWN
Block & Sub.Individual ownership area
Individual
Lot Area
Dwellings
Per Lot
Average
ownership
area in sq.
# of dwelling units
per Polk directory
per block
Average area per
dwelling per block Summary of all blocks
Imes Addition,
Block 49 Lots 1 & 2, partial lots 25 & 26 6000 1 A) Number of blocks - 14
Lots 3 & 4, partial lots 23 & 24 6000 1 B) Total number of dwellings - 179
lots 5 & 6 5000 0
C) Average area of block average of
ownership - 9,828 sq. ft.
lots 7 & 8 5000 1
D) Average area per dwelling for all
blocks - 7,933 sq. ft.
lots 9, 10, & 11 7500 1
E) Difference in average density of
sampled blocks and 6 dwellings per
acre is -9.3%.
lots 12 & 13 5500 1lots 14 & 15 5500 0
lots 16, 17, & 18 6750 0
lots 19 & 20 4500 1lots 21 & 22 4550 1partial lots 23, 24, 25, & 26 7500 1
5,800 8 dwellings total 7,350
Park Addition,
Block 11 lots 1, 2, & 3 9375 1
lots 4, 5, & 6 9375 1
lots 7 & 8 6250 1
lots 9 & 10 6250 0
lots 11 & 12 6250 1
lots 13 & 14 6250 1
lots 15 & 16 6250 1
lots 17 & 18 6250 1
lots 19 & 20 6250 1
lots 21 & 22 6250 1
217
lots23 & 24 6250 3
6,818 12 dwellings total 5,729
West Park
Addition, Block
24 partial lots 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 7665 1
partial lots 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5 7350 2
partial lot 5, all lot 6 6435 1
lots 7 & 8 7150 1
lots 9 & 10 7150 2
lots 11 & 12 7150 0
partial lots 13, 14, 15, & 16 5000 1
partial lots 13, 14, 15, & 16 9300 0
lots 17, 18, 19, & 20 14,300 1
partial lots 21, 22, 23, & 24 7150 1
partial lots 21, 22, 23, & 24 7150 0
7,800 10 dwellings total 6,220
Park Addition,
Block 46 lots 1-10 41250 0 City Park
partial lots 11, 12, 12A 9000 1
partial lots 11, 12, 12A 7500 2
lots 13, 13A - 24 57915 0 City Park
28,916 2 dwellings total 5,500
Fairview
Addition, Block
3 lots 1, 2, & 3 12600 1
lots 4 & 5 8400 1
lots 6, 7, 8, 9, & 10 21000 1
lots 11a, 12a, & 13a 3330 1
partial lots 11, 12, & 13 9540 0
lots 14 & 15 8460 1
lots 16 & 17 8460 1
218
lots 18, 19, & 20 12600 1
10,549 7 dwellings total 10,693
Fairview
Addition , Block
7 lots 1, 2 9000 1
lots 3, 4 9000 1
lot 5, partial lot 6 7950 1
partial lots 6, all lot 7, partial lot
8 7800 1
partial lots 8, all lots 9, 10 11250 1
lots 11, 12 9000 1
lots 13, 14 9000 1
partial lot 15, all lots 16, 17 10500 1
lots 18, 19 9000 1
lots 20, 21 9000 1
partial lot 22, partial lot 22A 5460 1
partial lot 22, partial lot 22A 6552 1
all lots 23A, 23, 24, 25, 26,
partial lot 27 27680 1
partial lot 27, all lots 28, 29,
partial lot 30 16000 1
partial lot 30, all lots 31, 32,
partial lot 33 14400 1
partial lot 33, all lots 34, 35, 36,
37, 38 26,400 1
lots 39, 40, 41 14400 1
lots 42, 43, 44 14400 1
12,044 18 dwellings total 12,044
Lindley & Guys
Addition, Block
A partial lot 1, partial lot 2 6500 1
219
partial lot 1 3750 1
partial lot 2 3750 1
lot 3 7000 1
lot 4 7000 1
lot 5 7000 1
lot 6 7000 1
lot 7 7000 1
lot 8 7000 1
lot 9 7000 1
lots 10, 11 14000 1
all lot 12, partial lot 13 10500 1
partial lot 13, all lot 14 10500 1
lot 15 6720 1
partial lot 16, partial lot 17 6000 1
partial lot 16, partial lot 17 4500 1
partial lot 17, partial lot 18 5600 1
partial lot 18 4900 1
lot 19 7000 1
lot 20 7000 1
lot 21 7000 1
lot 22 7000 1
lot 23 7000 1
lot 24 7000 1
lot 25 7000 1
lots 26, 27, partial lot 28 15400 1
partial lot 28, partial lot 29 9100 1
partial lot 29, all lot 30 10220 1
7,480 28 dwellings total 7,230
Butte Addition,
Block 9 lots 1, 2, 3, & 4 13500 1
lots 5, 6 6750 1
lots 7, 8 6750 1
220
lots 9, 10 6750 1
lots 11, 12 6750 1
lots 13, 14, 15, & 16 13500 1
lots 17, 18 6750 2
lots 19, 20, & 21 10125 1
lots 22, 23, & 24 10125 2
9,000 11 dwellings total 7,364
Butte Addition,
Block 17 partial lots 1, 2, 3, & 4 7000 1
partial lots 1, 2, 3, & 4 7000 1
lots 5, 6, & 7 10500 1
partial lots 8, 9, & 10 6550 1
partial lots 10, 11, & 12 4950 1
partial lots 8, 9, 10, 11, & 12 6000 1
lots 13, 14 7750 0
lots 15, 16, 17, & 18 15500 0
lots 19, 20, 21, & 22 11625 1
lot 23A 6375 1
lot 23B 5250 1
8,045 9 dwellings total 9,833
Karp's Addition,
Block 3 lot 1, partial lot 2 9375 1
partial lot 2, lot 3 9375 1
lot 4, partial lot 5 9375 1
partial lot 5, lot 6 9375 1
lot 7 6250 1
lot 8 6750 1
partial lots 9, 10 6111 1
partial lots 9, 10 6014 1
lot 11, partial lot 12 9375 1
221
partial lot 12, partial lot 13 7875 1
partial lot 13, lot 14 7875 1
lot 15 6250 1
lot 16 6250 1
lot 17, partial lot 18 8125 1
partial lot 18, partial lot 19 7500 1
partial lot 19, lot 20 9375 1
7,828 16 dwellings total 7,828
Babcock & davis
Addition, Block
5 partial lot 1 11040 1
partial lot 2 2480 1
partial lot 2 4400 1
partial lot 2 2350 2
partial lot 2 1590 1
partial lot 2 4060 1
partial lot 1, all lot 3 11040 1
lot 5 9200 1
lot 7 9200 1
lot 9 9200 1
lots 11, 13 20240 2
lot 4 9200 0
all lot 6, partial lot 8 12880 1
partial lot 8 5460 1
lot 10 9100 1
partial lot 12 4600 1
partial lot 14 4600 1
partial 12, partial 14 4600 1
partial 12, partial 14 4600 1
7,360 20 dwellings total 6,992
222
Northern Pacific
Addition, Block
45 all lots 1, 2, partial lot 3 8875 1
partial lot 3, all lots 4, 5 8875 1
lots 6, 7 7100 1
lots, 8, 9, 10 10650 2
lots 11, 12, 13, 14 14200 2
lots 15, 16 7100 1
partial lots 17, 18, 19, 20 7000 2
partial lots 17, 18, 19, 20 7100 1
lots 21, 22 7100 1
lots 23, 24, 25 10650 1
lots 26, 27 7100 1
lots 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 17750 1
9,458 15 dwellings total 7,567
Imes Addition,
Block 40 all lots 1, 2, partial lot 3 9600 1
partial lot 3, all lot 4, partial lot
5 9600 1
partial lot 5, all lot 6, 7, partial
lot 8 9600 1
partial lot 8, all lot 9, partial lot
10 9600 1
partial lot 10, all lots 11, 12 9600 2
lots 13, 14 7950 0
lots 15, 16 7950 1
lots 17, 18 7950 1
all lot 19, partial lot 20 5963 2
partial lot 20, all lot 21 5963 1
lots 22, 23, 24 11925 2
8,700 10 dwellings total 9,570
223
Beall's 3rd
Addition, Block
1 lots 1, 2 6750 1
lots 3, 4 7500 1
lots 5, 6 7500 1
lots 7, 8 7500 1
lots 9, 10 7500 1
lots 11, 12 7500 1
lots 13, 14, 15 10200 1
lots 16, 17, 18 10650 1
lots 19, 20, partial lot 21 9310 2
partial lot 21, all lots 22, 23, 24 11280 2
7,790 12 dwellings total 7,141
9,828 7,933
224
MID TOWN
Block & Sub.
Individual
ownership
area
Individual
Lot Area
Dwellings
Per Lot
Average
ownership
area in sq. ft.
# of
dwelling
units per
Polk
directory
per block
Average
area per
dwelling per
block Summary of all blocks
Westfield Sub, Block
2; Westfield Phase II,
Block 2 A) Number of blocks - 14
B) Total number of dwellings -
179
C) Average area of block
average of ownership - XXX sq.
ft.
D) Average area per dwelling for
all blocks -XXX sq. ft.
E) Difference in average density
of sampled blocks and 6
dwellings per acre is XX%.
Figgins Addition, Block 1, Lots 8-21
New Hyalite View, Block 4
225
NEW TOWN
Block & Sub.
Individual
ownership
area
Individual
Lot Area
Dwellings
Per Lot
Average
ownership
area in sq.
ft.
# of dwelling
units per Polk
directory per
block
Average area
per dwelling
per block Summary of all blocks
West Meadows
Sub Phase II, Lots
52-59 A) Number of blocks - 14
B) Total number of dwellings -
C) Average area of block
average of ownership - 9,828
sq. ft.
D) Average area per dwelling
for all blocks - XXXXX sq. ft.
E) Difference in average
density of sampled blocks and
6 dwellings per acre is XX%.
Alder Creek, Phase
II, Block 7
Meadow Creek Phase I, Block 14
Knolls at Hillcress, Block 3, Lots 15-23
VADHEIMS ARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK 3, THOMPSON ADDITION TO BOZEMAN NO. 4, Block 3N
1959 REARRANGEMENT OF BLOCK D, MARWYN REARRANGEMENT OF A PORTION OF NORTHERN PACIFIC ADDITION TO BOZeman, Block D
226