HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-18-17 City Commission Packet Materials - A5. Ordinance 1981 Provisional, Readopt 4598, 4B GuidelinesPage 1 of 24
17399, Staff Report for the Proposal to Affirm and Readopt Resolution 4598
(Adoption of Subchapter 4B to the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay District for the B-3 Halo) Design Guidelines
Public Hearing Date: Zoning Commission – September 5, 2017
City Commission – September 18, 2017
Project Description: A proposal to affirm and readopt Resolution 4598, as amended by
Resolution 4623, which added Subchapter 4B (design guidelines for commercial
development within the neighborhood conservation overlay district, specifically the
B-3 “halo”) into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District.
Project Location: The proposal applies within the B-3 zoning district to areas outside of
the Main Street Historic District. The B-3 district is generally between Olive Street
and Lamme Street on the south and north and between N. 5th Avenue and Broadway
on the west and east and is specifically designated on the City’s official zoning map.
Recommendation: Provisionally adopt Ordinance 1981.
Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the
findings presented in the staff report for application 17399 and move to recommend the City
Commission affirm and readopt Resolution 4598 which adopted Subchapter 4B (design
guidelines for commercial development within the neighborhood conservation overlay
district, specifically the B-3 “halo”) (including the amendments incorporated into Subchapter
4B by Resolution 4623 regarding an exemption from the step back and height transition
policies if abutting commercially zoned and a residentially zoned lots are under unified
ownership and are being developed under a master site plan) into the Design Guidelines for
the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District.
Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 17399 and move to provisionally adopt Ordinance
1981 affirming and readopting Resolution 4598 which adopted Subchapter 4B (design
guidelines for commercial development within the neighborhood conservation overlay
district, specifically the B-3 “halo”) (including the amendments incorporated into Subchapter
4B by Resolution 4623 regarding an exemption from the step back and height transition
policies if abutting commercially zoned and a residentially zoned lots are under unified
ownership and are being developed under a master site plan) into the Design Guidelines for
the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District.
Report Date: September 12, 2017
116
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 2 of 24
Staff Contact: Martin Matsen
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unresolved Issues
None identified.
Project Summary
The Commission adopted Resolution 4598 on May 18, 2015 amending the design guidelines
for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) (the “Design Guidelines”).
Resolution 4598 added a new Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines. The Commission
has directed an ordinance affirming and readopting Subchapter 4B into the Design
Guidelines be presented to the Zoning Commission, Historic Preservation Advisory Board,
and the Design Review Board to consider affirming and readopting of the inclusion of
Subchapter 4b into the Design Guidelines.
The proposal for affirmation and readoption is for the document as amended by Resolution
4623 which revised the subsection A.4 transition language.
Zoning Commission
The Zoning Commission conducted their public hearing on September 5, 2017. They passed
the recommended motion unanimously, 4-0. Public comment was received from two persons.
Links/summary to public comment is provided in Appendix B to this report.
Historic Preservation Advisory Board
The HPAB conducted their public meeting on September 12, 2017. See Section 1 for the
motions passed. The HPAB does not recommend approval. Public comment was received
from eight persons. Links/summary to public comment is provided in Appendix B to this
report.
Alternatives
1. Adoption of the ordinance as submitted.
2. Revision of the ordinance prior to adoption.
3. Continuation of the public hearing.
117
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 3 of 24
4. Do not approve the ordinance.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 2
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
Zoning Commission ............................................................................................................ 2
Historic Preservation Advisory Board ................................................................................ 2
Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 3
SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............................................................. 4
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ......................................................................... 5
PROTEST NOTICE................................................................................................................ 17
APPENDIX A - AFFECTED ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY PROVISIONS ............. 18
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ................................................... 23
APPENDIX C – APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF .................... 23
FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 24
ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 24
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the applicable criteria, the Staff recommends approval of the proposal as
submitted.
The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal on September 5, 2017 and
forwards a recommendation of approval to the Commission. The video of the public hearing
is available at https://media.avcaptureall.com/session.html?sessionid=860b5279-cad3-4669-
af64-307066307774&prefilter=654,3835. The portion of the meeting applicable to this item
is from the beginning of the video to 24 minutes.
118
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 4 of 24
The Historic Preservation Advisory Board held a public meeting on the proposal on
September 12, 2017. They do not recommend approval to the Commission. They made two
motions with unanimous votes:
1) Having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment, and all the
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application
17399 and move to not recommend the City Commission affirm and readopt Resolution 4598
which adopted Subchapter 4B (design guidelines for commercial development within the
neighborhood conservation overlay district, specifically the B-3 “halo”) (including the
amendments incorporated into Subchapter 4B by Resolution 4623 regarding an exemption
from the step back and height transition policies if abutting commercially zoned and a
residentially zoned lots are under unified ownership and are being developed under a master
site plan) into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District.
Rather, to recommend initiating a public process to rewrite subchapter 4B; this process
should include a neighborhood working group, at least two public workshops, and favorable
recommendations from the Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board, Design Review
Board, and Zoning Commission.
2) Having reviewed and considered the proposal and public comment and all of the
information presented, I move to encourage the commissioners to review the secretary of
interior’s 2017 historic preservation guidelines in relation to the NCOD and to prioritize the
NCOD guidelines as originally written without 4b to avoid compromising the values and
historical character within the NCOD guidelines. For example, the secretary of interior
standards do NOT recommend, “adding new construction that results in the diminution or
loss of the historic character of the building, including its design, materials, location, or
setting” (page 162). Furthermore, the secretary of interior standards do NOT recommend,
“Constructing a new building on a historic property or on an adjacent site that is much larger
than the historic building.”
The Design Review Board will hold a public meeting on the proposal on September 13, 2017
and may forward a recommendation to the Commission. An update on the action of the DRB
will be provided at the September 18th public hearing of the Commission.
The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposal on September 18, 2017. The
hearing will be held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m.
SECTION 2 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
The City’s Unified Development Code (UDC) (38.16.040, BMC) requires a certificate of
appropriateness for certain types of development in the NCOD. In evaluating whether a
119
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 5 of 24
certificate of appropriateness should be issued for a development proposal in the NCOD, the
development must meet certain standards. 38.16.050, BMC. In evaluating these zoning
regulations, the City must be guided by the NCOD Design Guidelines. In May of 2015, the
City Commission adopted Resolution 4598 that added a new Subchapter 4B to these Design
Guidelines. Subchapter 4B applies to development in the B3 portion of the NCOD and only
to areas outside the Main Street Historic District. Subchapter 4B was then amended on July
13, 2017, by Resolution 4623 (originally incorrectly numbered Resolution 4323).
The City must evaluate development proposals pursuant to established, sensible, fixed,
uniform and objective standards, criteria and guidelines. For purposes of certificates of
appropriateness, these standards, criteria, and guidelines are established at 38.16.050.A-C,
BMC. In determining whether these regulatory criteria are met, the City is guided by design
guidelines to evaluate the design of a project in relation to the established regulatory criteria.
The analysis provided below applies the criteria established in 76-2-304 for amendments or
changes to zoning regulations, MCA to Subchapter 4B, and demonstrates that the design
guidelines included in Subchapter 4B are: (i) reasonable guidelines to assist in the review of
a development proposal in the B3 Halo pursuant to 38.16.050.A-C; and (ii) assist in ensuring
the zoning regulations themselves substantially comply with these statutory criteria.
To adopt the proposal, the City Commission must find that Subchapter 4B when reviewed
against the statutory zoning criteria in 76-2-304(1), MCA supports the zoning regulations for
issuance of a certificate of appropriateness (i.e. the standards listed in 38.16.050.A-C) (see
subsections A-D, below). . At a minimum, the Commission must determine, when reviewed
against the zoning statute, the effect of the proposal in relation to the zoning regulations is at
least neutral. In addition, the Commission must consider the effect of Subchapter 4B on the
zoning regulations in light of the criteria listed in 76-2-304(2), MCA (i.e. subsections E-K
below). In addition, the Commission may determine the effect of the proposal on the criteria
be affirmative, neutral, or negative. A favorable decision on the proposal must find that the
application meets all of criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the proposal outweigh
negative outcomes for each of criteria E-K.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports the finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C to
are in accordance with and substantially comply with the City’s Community Plan (i.e. the
City’s growth policy). The Community Plan (BCP) was adopted in 2009 by Resolution 4163.
The BCP was confirmed as continuing to be adequate to the community’s needs by
120
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 6 of 24
Resolution 4578 in 2015. As authorized by state law, the City has also adopted neighborhood
plans under the growth policy. One of those neighborhood plans is the Downtown Bozeman
Improvement Plan (DBIP). The DBIP was adopted by Resolution 4230 in 2010.
One of the primary implementing tools for the BCP is the City’s zoning standards and
procedures, including the NCOD regulations and the standards for issuance of a certificate of
occupancy.
The BCP addresses many subjects in its 17 chapters and 13 appendices. Chapters 1-15 and 17
contains goal and objectives for specific topics. Chapter 16 discusses implementation of the
BCP. One of the implementing actions is amending the Bozeman Municipal Code. Chapter
38, Unified Development Code, is one portion of the Bozeman Municipal Code that includes
the City’s zoning program. Therefore, amendments to Chapter 38 are evaluated for
implementation of the growth policy.
The BCP does not establish one chapter or goal as a priority above another. The BCP does
not prioritize one use as more valuable for the community than another. It does establish a
variety of goals for the City to consider in developing implementing standards and
procedures. Examples of applicable goals and objectives relevant to this proposal include, but
are not limited to:
Goal LU-1: Create a sense of place that varies throughout the City, efficiently provides
public and private basic services and facilities in close proximity to where people live and
work, and minimizes sprawl.
Objective LU-1.4: Provide for and support infill development and redevelopment which
provides additional density of use while respecting the context of the existing
development which surrounds it. Respect for context does not automatically prohibit
difference in scale or design.
“Objective C-1.2: - Update design objectives to include guidelines for urban spaces and
more dense development.”
C-3 Neighborhood Design – New neighborhoods shall be pedestrian oriented, contain a
variety of housing types and densities, contain parks and other public spaces, have a
commercial center and defined boundaries.
C-4 Design Guidelines – Create illustrated design guidelines to give clear direction in
design and review of residential and non-residential neighborhoods without unduly
constraining architectural style and innovation.
C-5, Public Landscaping and Architecture – Enhance the urban appearance and
environment through the use of architectural excellence, landscaping, trees and open
space.,
121
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 7 of 24
ED-1: Promote and Encourage the Continued Development of Bozeman as a Vital
Economic Center
As discussed in the following excerpt from Chapter 3, the BCP recognizes that development
will cause change in the community and that not all change is either positive or negative.
Page 3-7 “Continued development of the community brings change. These changes will
bring mutual costs and benefits, as well as some detriments and benefits from the actions
of others which are felt more individually. In preparing and executing implementation it
is important to preserve fairness and reasonableness. Regulations may be expected to
seek mitigation of substantial actual impacts, not minor or only perceived impact on
preferences which are not supported by evidence. The established review criteria are an
effort to provide balance and consideration for all the affected parties in the evaluation of
development impacts. The use of public facilities in conformance with the standards and
programs adopted by the City is not an unreasonable or burdensome impact of
development. The City’s standards, while respectful of the community values and
diversity of interests, will not yield outcomes which satisfy every person in each
situation.”
The City has adopted specific review standards and procedures to identify consequences of
development and to identify when mitigation of impacts from the development is required.
Some impacts are favorable and no mitigation is required. Some impacts are small or within
the normal scope of a zoning district’s allowed ranges and no mitigation is required.
The purpose of the present proposal is to consider whether Subchapter 4B assists city staff,
designers, and the public understand and describe how acceptable ranges of development
within the B-3 halo look and operate. Subchapter 4Bdoes not alter the uses or basic
numerical standards established for the B-3 zone and which were previously found to
conform to the growth policy. As shown below, Subchapter 4B does, however, substantially
comply with the growth policy because Subchapter 4B provides guidelines for how
development of commercial and mixed use properties in the B3 halo should be designed so
as to “balance and consideration for all the affected parties in the evaluation of development
impacts” by “seek[ing] mitigation of substantial actual impacts.”
Bozeman Community Plan, pg. 3-7.
The BCP includes statements in various places supporting intensified development within
previously developed areas and the need for such development to be compatible with existing
development. The glossary of the BCP defines what is considered compatible. See excerpts
below.
122
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 8 of 24
Page K-1 “Compatible Development. The use of land and the construction and use of
structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and
the goals and objectives of this plan. Elements of compatible development include, but
are not limited to: variety of architectural design; rhythm; scale; intensity; materials;
building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing
community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area,
motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible
development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design.”
“Compatible Land Use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its
discernible outward effects, exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing
character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited
to, noise, odor, light, and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or
explosive materials.”
As noted in the excerpts, many individual elements contribute to a determination of
compatibility. The proposed amendments are one method by which the City Commission can
provide guidance on the implementation of these excerpts.
For example, section A of the proposal addresses the mass and scale of buildings. Building
mass is the objective measure of the volume of a building defined by its height, width, and
depth. The scale is the relationship of a particular building, in terms of building mass, to
other nearby and adjacent buildings. Scale is both an objective mathematical measure and a
perceived relationship.
Subsection A.3 establishes design guidelines discussing how the perceived scale of a
structure can be reduced by layering of design elements and combining of materials to reduce
single facades of a single material are presented. Such layering breaks up the perceived size
of the façade and creates both three dimensional variation on the façade as well as visually
distinct portions of the building. This reduces the perceived scale of the building.
Subsection A.4 establishes a guideline for boundaries between zones where a distinction in
allowed building heights and setbacks occurs. The guideline suggests a step back approach to
lessen the objective height of a building immediately adjacent to a residentially zoned area to
a height equal to the maximum allowed in residential zones. The building can increase in size
as distance from the zoning boundary increases until it reaches its allowed maximum height
in the B-3 zoning district. This provides for a transition in both mass and scale from less to
more intensively allowed development that increases harmony with adjoining development.
In addition to the text of the BCP, as noted above, the DBIP is a neighborhood plan within
the BCP. This means that it provides a more detailed evaluation of the issues within the BCP
123
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 9 of 24
focused on a portion of the community. In this case, as shown on page 5 of the DBIP, that is
largely within the area defined within the current B-3 district.
The DBIP provides discussion of guiding principles, goals, and implementation steps. These
include items relating to uses of property, scale and design of development, infrastructure,
and design guidelines. The DBIP recognizes a distinction between the historic commercial
core located within the Main Street Historic District and surrounding commercial properties.
The DBIP encourages creation of design guidelines that are more customized to different
portions of the planning area. The present amendments distinguish development that is
outside of the historic district or historically eligible structures. This is consistent with the
desired outcome from the DBIP described on page 39, which reads in part.
“Downtown is currently governed by a set of guidelines, but these are principally
applicable to the core and not other areas. A set of standards and guidelines should be
created to help inform new development outside of historic Main Street.”
Page 40 of the DBIP discusses revisions to the individual project review process. Among
other suggestions, it says:
“The test of any review should be: “Does it comply with adopted City standards?” Project
design should not be subject to widely varying personal opinions. The standards should
be adopted by the City Commission, … The review of a specific project is not the time to
debate these; the issue during review should be whether the project comports with current
standards.”
The proposal meets these two statements and therefore is in accordance with the growth
policy by providing guidelines, adopted by the City Commission, to give direction on
whether a particular project has met the regulatory standards adopted in 38.16.050.A-C.
Subsection A.1 makes specific mention of elements to implement the DBIP.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in securing safety from fire and other dangers as properties in the B3 Halo area
redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations. Subchapter 4B does not change
any existing zoning regulation that directly apply to securing safety from fire and other
dangers. All zoning and building code review processes will continue as they are currently in
effect.
Subchapter 4B includes a policy for site design that recognizes pedestrian environments and
the creation of public spaces in an urbanizing setting. These guidelines can ensure safety of
users of the public spaces as the Halo area further intensifies. In addition, the street pattern
124
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 10 of 24
guidelines recognize the desire to preserve street and alley patterns that exist in the
downtown area. The inclusion of alleys where feasible can facilitate emergency response.
Likewise, the guidelines for utilities and service areas recognize the impact of urbanizing
environments on the provision of public services and encourage design that minimizes the
impact of utility and other public services on the street and pedestrian facilities.
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare as properties in the B3 Halo
area redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations.
Section D addresses site design and its roles in creating safe bicycle and pedestrian
experiences. Improved and maintained public safety directly addresses this criterion. The
guidelines encourages designs that provide passive monitoring of public spaces like streets
and activities within public spaces. Active and monitored spaces have less vandalism and
other negative activities.
Section G addresses street patterns. Preservation and use of alleys enables a separation of
utilities and service functions. This reduces the number of points of vehicle/pedestrian
crossing along the street which improves pedestrian safety by lessening the chance of a
pedestrian/vehicle collision. This also is addresses in Section I. The guideline also
encourages preservation and installation of sidewalks and boulevard strips that provide a safe
location for pedestrian travel. Section J addresses site furniture such as benches and trash
receptacles. Correct placement reduces conflict with pedestrians, enables ready collection of
trash to reduce litter and waste which can be a health hazard. Provision of benches and
similar resting places can support use of pedestrian areas by persons with mobility limitations
by providing places to rest out of the path of travel but within visibility so their wellbeing can
be informally monitored.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public requirements.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewer, schools, parks, and other
public requirements as properties in the B3 Halo area redevelop according to the underlying
zoning regulations. The proposed amendments do not change any of the standards addressing
these subjects. Each development is evaluated prior to construction and when necessary
mitigation of impacts is required to ensure an acceptable level of service continues. Examples
125
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 11 of 24
of the mitigation that occurs during development review includes provision of additional
water rights or park dedication.
Section I of the proposal addresses utilities and service areas. This criterion relates to how
utilities and transportation are provided. As discussed in C above, alleys serve an important
role in providing for utility access. Therefore Sections I and G are mutually reinforcing to
enable essential public requirements to be provided and coordinated with the site and
building designs addressed in Sections B, D, E, and H. The proposal addresses this criterion
by creating guidelines that coordinate across multiple design fields to ensure that necessary
public requirements are done in a manner that creates a healthful and welcoming site.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in the reasonable provision of adequate light and air as properties in the B3 Halo area
redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations. Subchapter 4B does not alter
existing requirements for open spaces or parks. Section A.4 of Subchapter 4B establishes a
guideline for a building step back where commercial and residential zones meet at property
boundaries or across alleys. This approach lessens the height distinctions between adjacent
properties thus ensuring, in an urbanizing environment, that light and air is reasonably
maintained between properties. The amendments do not alter current zoning regulations
regarding setbacks, maximum building heights, or lot coverage requirements.
F. Effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Yes. The proposed amendments do not alter existing UDC transportation standards,
numerical parking requirements, or street cross-sections. All properties in Bozeman are
required to have sidewalks for non-motorized travel. The proposed amendments do not
increase the maximum development potential of zoned properties.
Sections D, E, G address this criterion. The character of the building adjacent to a sidewalk
and how parking facilities are placed have a significant effect on how safe and pleasant it is
to use the sidewalk. Subsection D.1 requires transparency along certain streets. This provides
for both a more visually interesting walking experience as well as observation of the
sidewalk that improves safety of the user. Section E addresses parking facilities. The B-3
area has a number of public and shared parking facilities. As the most intensively developed
area of town, space is at a premium and parking is very consumptive of space. The design of
parking facilities affects their efficiency of use and they have a substantial visual impact as
well. The proposal encourages shared parking facilities that are more efficient and less space
consumptive. This has a positive impact on the larger community and facilitates additional
development downtown.
126
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 12 of 24
The architectural design elements of the guideline helps maintain an interesting and active
street façade that encourages pedestrian travel. A more compact development pattern has a
generally positive impact on the ability to use non-motorized transportation, as destinations
are closer. Preservation of the traditional street and alley pattern as encouraged in Section G
enables multiple alternate routes that enables a more robust motorized and non-motorized
system. If a portion of a street is blocked, there are alternatives that enable travel to continue
effectively.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in the promotion of compatible urban growth as properties in the B3 Halo area
redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations.
The proposal is limited in application to within the B-3 district and outside of the Main Street
Historic District. The B-3 district is over the downtown area. It will therefore not alter
standards for or development on the edge of the community. The text of the amendment
recognizes the distinct character of the Main Street Historic District. The proposed
amendment emphasizes increased development within the B-3 area with use of enclosed
parking to reduce consumption of land. This enables additional building area over the
parking spaces lessening demand for new land for development.
Section 38.10.10.A.4 establishes the intent and purpose of the B-3 district.
“4. The intent of the B-3 central business district is to provide a central area for the
community's business, government service and cultural activities. Uses within this district
should be appropriate to such a focal center with inappropriate uses being excluded.
Room should be provided in appropriate areas for logical and planned expansion of the
present district.”
“Logical and planned expansion” is not limited to horizontal growth of the district. The B-3
district allows a base maximum building height of 70 feet, higher than the allowed heights of
other districts. The intent of the district is to enable the “logical and planned expansion” to
occur vertically. Few of the existing buildings in the B-3 district reach the allowed maximum
height. The opportunity for new buildings to be taller occurs right up to the outer boundary of
the district. This creates a potential conflict with shorter adjacent development. Section A
and B directly address this concern with guidelines for architectural design, transitions and
quality materials to cause new growth to be more compatible than it might otherwise be.
As shown in Appendix A to this report, the intent of the NCOD and the adopted design
standards specifically provide for additional development within existing developed areas.
127
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 13 of 24
This includes both contemporary and traditional architectural design approaches. Subsection
A.2 expressly encourages innovation and diversity in design approaches. The buildings in the
B-3 and adjacent areas have been constructed over more than a century and show many
different design styles and techniques. There is no restriction to one or few architectural
styles in the municipal code.
Subsection A.4 establishes a guideline for boundaries between zones where a distinction in
allowed building heights and setbacks occurs. The guideline suggests a step back approach to
lessen the objective height of a building immediately adjacent to a residentially zoned area to
a height equal to the maximum allowed in residential zones. The building can increase in size
as distance from the zoning boundary increases until it reaches its allowed maximum height
in the B-3 zoning district. This provides for a transition in both mass and scale from less to
more intensively allowed development that increases compatibility with adjoining
development. As discussed under Criterion A, the growth policy includes a definition of
compatible development that the proposal advances.
Section B of the proposal calls for high quality buildings. Investment in quality materials and
architecture avoids detracting from existing development.
Section C of the proposal suggests the placement of mechanical equipment on a roof when
feasible. Roof placement lessens sound impacts to adjacent properties by providing a
physical separation between the equipment and neighboring users.
Section D addresses site design, including making connections to existing surrounding
neighborhoods. This promotes compatible urban growth by avoiding isolated monolithic
buildings that disconnect visually or functionally from nearby properties.
Connections in an urban setting often occur along the street system. Bozeman’s central core
streets are organized in a grid pattern interspersed with alleys. The street system includes not
just the driving surface but also sidewalks and mature street trees. These three elements
continue into surrounding neighborhoods and are one of the defining features of the older
portions of the community. The street system is a unifying feature that ties together the B-3
area with adjacent areas both physically and visually. These issues also connects Sections G
and H which address streets and landscape design. Street trees are one of the largest
landscape design elements in the intense urban development within the B-3 district. As noted
above and described in Section E, parking facilities affect the visual and functional character
of an area. As the beginning and ending points for most vehicle travel parking facilities are
also an element of the street system. Enclosed parking facilities integrated with new
buildings as encouraged in E.1 lessen the visual impact of development, constrain noise, and
reduce impacts which increases the compatibility of urban growth.
128
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 14 of 24
Collectively, Sections A-E, G and H identify and reduce the potential negative impacts of
development. This enable new development to be able to meet the definition of compatible
development included in the municipal code. This promotes compatible urban growth.
“Sec. 38.42.670. - Compatible development.
The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with
adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's
adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited
to, variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity;
materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with
existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the
area, motorized and nonmotorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible
development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design,
density or use.”
H. Character of the district.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in developing and protecting the character of the district as properties in the B3 Halo
area redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations. Undeniably, the character of a
zoning district is comprised of many elements. Readoption of Subchapter 4B does not change
setbacks, maximum building heights, park requirements, allowed uses, parking standards, or
landscaping requirements. The proposal clearly does address mass and scale, site and
building design, among others.
The B-3 zoning district focuses on a higher intensity of development compared with the rest
of the community because it is the City’s commercial and residential core. The B-3 is
characterized by the smallest setbacks and tallest building heights allowed in the City. The
most iconic buildings in Bozeman, such as the Baxter Hotel, County Courthouse, Ellen
Theatre, and Bozeman Hotel line Main Street. The Baxter Hotel is the tallest building in the
community outside of the university.
An important purpose of the NCOD is to encourage contemporary design: “Contemporary
design will be encouraged, provided it is in keeping with the above-stated criteria, as an
acknowledged fact of the continuing developmental pattern of a dynamic, changing
community.” Another purpose of the NCOD is to stimulate restoration and rehabilitation of
structures that contribute to the character of established neighborhoods. Both purposes are
stated in 38.16.010.C. There can be a tension between those two purposes as expressed in
129
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 15 of 24
this selection from the NCOD intent statement, 38.16.010.C: “New construction will be
invited and encouraged provided primary emphasis is given to the preservation of existing
buildings and further provided the design of such new space enhances and contributes to the
aesthetic character and function of the property and the surrounding neighborhood or area.”
In addition, the character of the B3 is changing. Subchapter 4B will assist in ensuring such
change supports the character of the district while minimizing impacts to historic uses and
structures even if those historic uses and structures are characterized as non-conforming. The
B-3 zone includes existing residential buildings that are not in conformance to the expected
uses in the B-3 zone. See 38.10.020, BMC. Section 38.32.010 makes plain that while
nonconforming uses may continue, they are expected to end over time and be replaced with
uses that match the established zoning district.
As these changes occur or as commercial property redevelops, Subchapter 4B will support
ensuring design of new and remodeled structures in the Halo “…enhance[] and contribute[]
to the aesthetic character and function of the property and the surrounding neighborhood or
area.” as stated on page 9 of the Bozeman Guidelines for Historic Preservation and the
Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District. As the City must be guided by Subchapter 4B
in its evaluation of the impact of a building in relation to the certificate of appropriateness
and site plan criteria, the guidelines included in Subchapter 4B reasonably ensure impacts of
development support the underlying character of the B3 zoning district.
The design guidelines for the NCOD were adopted in 2006. They provide guidance in
answering the question of what enhances or contributes to aesthetic character and function
and the design standards of 38.16.050.A-C. The community has experienced change in many
ways since 2006 and it is appropriate that the guidelines likewise be updated to reflect
changing community needs. The nature of aesthetics evaluation is that there is no single
agreed standard like there is to measure distance or weight. The guidelines define individual
elements of design and strive to provide a description of what is considered acceptable while
recognizing that there is no one architectural response that is a “right” answer. The design
guidelines include Chapter 4 for the commercial character area. The proposal creates more
specialized standards for development of properties within the B-3 area outside of the
historic district (and excluding property individually listed on the National Register of
Historic Places). This is responsive to the changing character of the district.
The character of the district also includes the transition between the B3 and adjacent zoning
districts. Development on the edge of any zoning district will have some impact on adjacent
differently zoned property. Subchapter 4B provides guidelines for the building interface with
residentially zoned properties (See Subchapter 4B, Sect. A.4). The design guidelines address
the need to be sensitive to the interface where the properties meet by meeting the required
130
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 16 of 24
setback from the residentially zoned property and providing a transition zone. The guidelines
establish require the building “stepback” at an angle from the adjacent property thus reducing
impacts on adjacent residential property and enhancing and protecting the character of the B3
district. Indeed, the addition of the step back may make it less likely that new buildings
adjacent to or across an alley from a residential zoning district will be able to use the
maximum height of 70 feet as allowed in the B3.
There is an illustrating exhibit at the beginning of Subchapter 4B which depicts the area
where it applies. Since the adoption of Subchapter 4B, the City has amended the zoning map
to the east end of the B-3 district so that it has expanded. Should the Commission decide to
readopt Subchapter 4B, the exhibit will be revised to show the current B-3 boundaries.
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Neutral. The proposed amendments do not alter the uses allowed in any zoning district.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in conserving the value of buildings as properties in the B3 Halo area redevelop
according to the underlying zoning regulations. Importantly, Subchapter 4B recognizes new
buildings should be designed to a high level of permanence and quality and that sustainable
methods and techniques are applied to not only the building but to site layout and
infrastructure.
The introduction to subchapter 4B also notes the need to consider additions or renovations of
existing underutilized buildings. Older existing buildings are a unique challenge with older
construction techniques requiring creativity and care to remodel or expand to meet modern
construction codes. Uncertainty as to the applicable standards makes renovations less likely.
The proposal provides greater clarity in how the City will apply the standards of
38.16.050.A-C. Improving certainty in applicable design standards supports conserving the
value in existing building by enabling building owners to make more reliable decisions in
renovation rather than simply demolishing an existing building to begin new construction.
The City has seen this outcome from its technical assistance grant programs that provide
funding to analyze older buildings and identify options for renovation. Building owners
knowing the scope of what work they needs to do to meet their goals encourages confidence
in pursuing projects.
Other components of Subchapter 4B support the conservation of the value of buildings. For
example, the landscape design, site furniture, signage, site design, etc. each provide specific
guidelines to create streetscapes and built environments that are attractive places to live and
131
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 17 of 24
work and create desirable neighborhoods. These types of design guidelines clearly have the
effect of conserving the value of buildings.
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Yes, the proposal to readopt Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines supports a finding
that the standards for issuance of a certificate of appropriateness found at 38.16.050.A-C
assist in encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the B3 and the City as
properties in the B3 Halo area redevelop according to the underlying zoning regulations.
The BCP and BDIP recognize the changing nature of the City’s core, especially the
downtown and its historic Main Street and the manner in which redevelopment of the B3
should occur. See e.g., Guiding Principles in the DBIP. As such, the most appropriate use of
land in the B3 (as currently stated in the B3 district’s intent and purpose) is to “provide a
central area for the community’s business, government service, and culture activities…”
(38.10.010.A.4, BMC) and to provide for higher density residential, commercial, and mixed
use development.
Page C-10 of the BCP includes an analysis of the intensity of non-residential development
from 2004-2007. It looks at the ratio of building area to lot area for site plans throughout the
city and with the B-3 district broken out. That data shows a consistent pattern where
development in the B-3 district is between 5-7 times more intensive than in other areas of the
community. This analysis predated the DBIP or BCP, indicates that intense development in
the downtown is a long term trend, and appropriate to the overall development of the
community.
In addition, Readoption of Subchapter 4B does not change allowed uses in any zoning
district.
PROTEST NOTICE
IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST THE PROPOSAL SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AREA AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSAL OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM
A LOT INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSAL, THE PROPOSAL SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal
described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City
Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s)
of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that
132
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 18 of 24
lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and
must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i)
contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the
protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including
listing all owners of the property and the physical address and legal description of the
property), to protest the action against which the protest is lodged, including ownership of
property affected by the action. Signers are encouraged to print their names after their
signatures. A person may in writing withdraw a previously filed protest at any time prior to
final action by the City Commission. Protests must be delivered to the Bozeman City
Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230.
APPENDIX A - AFFECTED ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
PROVISIONS
Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The intent of the B-3 zoning district is provided in 38.10.010.A.4:
“The intent of the B-3 central business district is to provide a central area for the
community's business, government service and cultural activities. Uses within this district
should be appropriate to such a focal center with inappropriate uses being excluded. Room
should be provided in appropriate areas for logical and planned expansion of the present
district.
a. It is the intent of this district to encourage high volume, pedestrian-oriented uses in
ground floor space in the "core area" of the city's central business district, i.e., along
Main Street from Grand to Rouse and to the alleys one-half block north and south from
Main Street. Lower volume pedestrian uses such as professional offices may locate on
ground floor space in the B-3 area outside the above-defined core.”
The proposed amendments also occur within the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District (NCOD). The intent of the NCOD is:
Sec. 38.16.010. - Intent and purpose.
A. All new construction, alterations to existing structures, movement of structures into or out
of the neighborhood conservation overlay district, hereinafter referred to as the conservation
district, or demolition of structures by any means or process will be subject to design review
unless specifically exempted. The recommendations of the design review board or
133
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 19 of 24
administrative design review staff shall be given careful consideration in the final action of
the review authority.
B. This article defines and sets forth standards which apply to the conservation district.
C. The intent and purpose of the conservation district designation is to stimulate the
restoration and rehabilitation of structures, and all other elements contributing to the
character and fabric of established residential neighborhoods and commercial or industrial
areas. New construction will be invited and encouraged provided primary emphasis is given
to the preservation of existing buildings and further provided the design of such new space
enhances and contributes to the aesthetic character and function of the property and the
surrounding neighborhood or area. Contemporary design will be encouraged, provided it is in
keeping with the above-stated criteria, as an acknowledged fact of the continuing
developmental pattern of a dynamic, changing community. The neighboring community shall
be provided notice and opportunity to comment upon the proposed property improvements in
accordance with article 40 of this chapter. In addition, aggrieved persons shall have the right
to appeal any design review decision made under the provisions of this article, in accordance
with article 35 of this chapter.
D. In view of the fact that most of the area included within the boundaries of the
conservation district was developed and built out prior to the adoption of zoning and
contemporary subdivision regulations, the construction, development pattern and range of
uses is highly diverse and may not be in compliance with conventional regulatory
requirements. This article recognizes that this diversity is a major contributing element of the
historic character of these neighborhoods or areas. The provisions of this article shall be
applied in a manner that will encourage the protection and enhancement of the many diverse
features for future generations.
E. The conservation district boundary is largely coterminous with the area surveyed in the
effort that led to the listing of nine historic districts and 40 additional landmark structures in
the National Register of Historic Places, and includes the nine designated historic districts
and 40 individual landmarks. This article sets forth the means of protecting and enhancing
the conservation district.
F. It is further the purpose of the conservation district designation to protect and enhance
neighborhoods or areas of significant land planning or architectural character, historic
landmarks or other built or natural features for the educational, cultural, economic benefit or
enjoyment of citizens of the city. It will be the policy and responsibility of the administrative
entities of this article to:
1. Protect, preserve, enhance and regulate structures, archaeological or cultural sites,
and areas that:
134
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 20 of 24
a. Are reminders of past eras, events or persons important in local, state or
national history;
b. Provide significant examples of land planning or architectural styles, or
are landmarks in the history of land planning and architecture;
c. Are unique or irreplaceable assets to the city and its neighborhoods;
d. Provide examples of physical surroundings in which past generations
lived; or
e. Represent and express the unique characteristics of small agricultural-
based, western city developmental patterns;
2. Enhance property values through the stabilization of neighborhoods and areas of
the city, increase economic and financial benefits to the city and its inhabitants, and
promote tourist trade and interests;
3. Develop and maintain the appropriate environment for buildings, structures, sites
and areas, that reflect varied planning and architectural styles and distinguished phases of
the city's history and prehistory;
4. Stimulate an enhancement of human life by developing educational and cultural
dimensions, which foster the knowledge of the city's heritage, and cultivate civic pride in
the accomplishments of the past;
5. Seek to maintain and enhance the many private and public elements that are
unique to the fabric, theme and character of each neighborhood and area, including, but
not limited to, lighting, pathways, street trees, natural areas and other features that may,
from time to time, be identified by the citizens and property owners of neighborhoods,
areas and subsections thereof; and
6. Provide the neighboring community with notice and opportunity to comment
upon the proposed property improvements in accordance with article 40 of this chapter,
with the exception of certain sketch plan applications with potentially little neighborhood
impact, and to further provide aggrieved persons with the right to appeal review decisions
made under the provisions of this article, in accordance with article 35 of this chapter.
G. It is further the purpose of this article to protect historic structures and sites as defined in
sections 38.42.1365 and 38.42.1370 by requiring any person seeking to demolish or move a
historic structure or site to comply with section 38.19.080 whether or not the structure is
located within the NCOD.
135
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 21 of 24
The proposed guidelines are to implement the adopted design standards of 38.16.050, which
reads:
Sec. 38.16.050. - Standards for certificates of appropriateness.
A. All work performed in completion of an approved certificate of appropriateness shall be
in conformance with the most recent edition of the Secretary of Interior's Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring
and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (published 1995), published by U.S. Department of
the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,
Heritage Preservation Services, Washington, D.C. (available for review at the planning
department).
B. Architectural appearance design guidelines used to consider the appropriateness and
compatibility of proposed alterations with original design features of subject structures, or
properties and with neighboring structures and properties, shall focus upon the following:
1. Height;
2. Proportions of doors and windows;
3. Relationship of building masses and spaces;
4. Roof shape;
5. Scale;
6. Directional expression, with regard to the dominant horizontal or vertical
expression of surrounding structures;
7. Architectural details;
8. Concealment of nonperiod appurtenances, such as mechanical equipment; and
9. Materials and color schemes (any requirements or conditions imposed regarding
color schemes shall be limited to the prevention of nuisances upon abutting properties
and prevention of degradation of features on the property in question. Color schemes may
be considered as primary design elements if a deviation from the underlying zoning is
requested).
C. Contemporary, nonperiod and innovative design of new structures and additions to
existing structures shall be encouraged when such new construction or additions do not
destroy significant historical, cultural or architectural structures or their components and
when such design is compatible with the foregoing elements of the structure and surrounding
structures.
136
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 22 of 24
D. When applying the standards of subsections A through C of this section, the review
authority shall be guided by the design guidelines for the neighborhood conservation overlay
district which are hereby incorporated by this reference. Application of the design guidelines
may vary by property as explained in the introduction to the design guidelines. When
reviewing a contemporary, non-period, or innovative design of new structures or addition to
existing structure, the review authority shall be guided by the design guidelines for the
neighborhood conservation overlay district to determine whether the proposal is compatible
with any existing or surrounding structures.
E. Conformance with other applicable development standards of this chapter.
F. Tax abatement certificate of appropriateness applications are also reviewed with the
procedures and standards established in chapter 2, article 6, division 2.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
The proposal applies within the B-3 zoning district. The B-3 district implements the
Community Core growth policy designation that reads as follows:
“Community Core. The traditional core of Bozeman is the historic downtown. This area
has an extensive mutually supportive diversity of uses, a strong pedestrian and multi-
modal transportation network, and a rich architectural character. Essential government
services, places of public assembly, and open spaces provide the civic and social core of
town. Residential development on upper floors is well established. New residential uses
should be high density. The area along Main Street should be preserved as a place for
high pedestrian activity uses, with strong pedestrian connectivity to other uses on nearby
streets. Users are drawn from the entire planning area and beyond. The intensity of
development is high with a Floor Area Ratio well over 1. Future development should
continue to be intense while providing areas of transition to adjacent areas and preserving
the historic character of Main Street.”
Neighborhood Plan
The City adopted the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan (DBIP) as a neighborhood
plan under the umbrella of the growth policy. A neighborhood plan works inside the general
framework established by the overall growth policy (Bozeman Community Plan). It focuses
on a finer level of detail and more specific implementation that can realistically be achieved
by a community wide document.
137
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 23 of 24
The DBIP includes nine strategies to implement its guiding principles. In summary, the DBIP
seeks to strengthen the downtown through encouragement of additional residential and
commercial development. The document is available through the City’s website.
On page 39 of the DBIP, it identifies an implementation strategy of creating additional
design guidelines for the area outside of Main Street. It describes some of the characteristics
of how those guidelines could work.
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle as required by Article 38.40, BMC.
Published notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the Zoning
Commission and City Commission public hearings on September 5, 2017 and September 18,
2017. Notice of the public hearings as well as the public meetings before the Historic
Preservation Advisory Board and Design Review Board is also provided by posting agendas
on the City’s designated agenda board at least 48 hours prior to any meeting. The agenda of
the Bozeman City Commission is published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle.
Two members of the public spoke at the Zoning Commission hearing. Their comments are
available through the recording of the meeting
at https://media.avcaptureall.com/session.html?sessionid=860b5279-cad3-4669-af64-
307066307774&prefilter=654,3835. Minutes of the meeting are also attached.
Seven written comments have been received, all of which predated the public notice for the
item. The text of the comments are included in the City Commission correspondence online
archive. The archive is available
at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/Browse.aspx?startid=134247.
At the HPAB meeting eight persons spoke, seven of which addressed the issue of readoption
of Subchapter 4B. There was a mix of positions and issues discussed with no person speaking
in favor of readoption. A recording of the comments is available on the City’s TV page
at https://www.bozeman.net/services/city-tv-and-streaming-audio prior to the Commission
hearing. A written comment was received the afternoon of the 12th which is attached.
Public comment received at the DRB meeting will be provided to the City Commission prior
to or at the September 18, 2017 public hearing.
APPENDIX C – APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Applicant: City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230, Bozeman MT 59718
Report By: Martin Matsen
138
17399 Staff Report for Affirming and Readoption of Resolution 4598 – Inclusion of
Subchapter 4B into the Design Guidelines for the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay
District
Page 24 of 24
FISCAL EFFECTS
None identified.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Ordinance 1981 and Exhibit A
Resolution 4598 and Subchapter 4B of the NCOD Design Guidelines
Resolution 4623 and amended Subchapter 4B
Exhibit of updated boundary map showing revised B-3 boundary reflecting zone map
amendments since the adoption of Resolution 4598.
Zoning Commission minutes
Public comment
139
Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO. 1981
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA AFFIRMING AND READOPTING SUBCHAPTER 4B OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES
AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, Subchapter 4B of the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD)
Design Guidelines was adopted by City Commission Resolution 4598 on May 18, 2015, and
revised by City Commission Resolution 4623 on July 13, 2015; and
WHEREAS, questions have arisen regarding the process followed in May of 2015 to
provide notice to the public of the adoption of Resolution 4598;
WHEREAS, on August 14, 2017 the City Commission voted to direct the City Manager
to commence a process to present to the City Commission for its consideration a resolution or
ordinance affirming and readopting the inclusion of Subchapter 4B (Guidelines for the B3
Commercial Character Area) into the NCOD Design Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, the Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal to affirm and
readopt Subchapter 4B on September 5, 2017 and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the
City Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Advisory Board held a public meeting on the
proposal on September 12, 2017 and does not recommend affirmation and readoption of
Subchapter 4B; and
140
Ordinance 1981, Affirming and Readopting Subchapter 4B to the NCOD Design Guidelines
Page 2 of 6
WHEREAS, the Design Review Board held a public meeting on the proposal on
September 13, 2017 and [does/does not] recommend affirmation and readoption of Subchapter 4B;
and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the city and public welfare to establish sensible, fixed,
uniform and objective development sandards, criteria and guidelines.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Legislative findings:
1. The City must evaluate development proposals pursuant to established, sensible, fixed,
uniform and objective standards, criteria and guidelines.
2. For purposes of certificates of appropriateness, these standards, criteria, and guidelines are
established at 38.16.050.A-C, BMC.
3. In determining whether these regulatory criteria are met, the City is guided by design
guidelines to evaluate the design of a project in relation to the established regulatory
criteria.
4. Subchapter 4B of the NCOD Design Guidelines when reviewed against the statutory
zoning criteria in 76-2-304, MCA supports the zoning regulations for issuance of a
certificate of appropriateness.
5. The City Commission adopts the findings in the staff report for application 17399.
141
Ordinance 1981, Affirming and Readopting Subchapter 4B to the NCOD Design Guidelines
Page 3 of 6
Section 2
Subchapter 4B of the NCOD Design Guidelines, attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby
affirmed and readopted.
Section 3
Repealer.
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force
and effect.
Section 4
Savings Provision.
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were
incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other
provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 5
Severability.
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman
Municipal Code as a whole.
142
Ordinance 1981, Affirming and Readopting Subchapter 4B to the NCOD Design Guidelines
Page 4 of 6
Section 6
Codification.
This ordinance shall not be codified but shall be kept by the City Clerk and entered into a
disposition list in numerical order with all other ordinances of the City.
Section 7
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on thirty (30) days after final adoption.
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the 18th day of September, 2017.
____________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________ ROBIN CROUGH City Clerk
143
Ordinance 1981, Affirming and Readopting Subchapter 4B to the NCOD Design Guidelines
Page 5 of 6
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2017. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 2017.
_________________________________
CARSON TAYLOR Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________ ROBIN CROUGH City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney
144
Ordinance 1981, Affirming and Readopting Subchapter 4B to the NCOD Design Guidelines
Page 6 of 6
EXHIBIT A
145
1
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
SUBCHAPTER 4-B
GUIDELINES FOR THE
B-3 COMMERCIAL CHARACTER AREA
Downtown Bozeman should be the location of buildings of greatest height and intensity in the
community. The following guidelines apply to properties zoned B-3 (Central Business District) that
serves as a transition between the Main Street Historic District and residentially zoned
neighborhoods. Underdevelopment of this transitional zone is a major concern. The downtown
district is planned for continued intensification over time with building additions as well as new
construction replacing dilapidated and underutilized older structures on underdeveloped properties.
Housing–for all income levels–should be encouraged by a variety of methods to support the
continued economic vitality of the Downtown Bozeman business district, which is broadly
recognized as one of Bozeman’s strongest assets.
This chapter contains guidelines for new commercial, residential and mixed use development
located within B-3 zoned areas outside of the defined Main Street Historic District, as shown in
Figure 1.1. Note that buildings individually listed on the National Register of Historic Places or within
designated historic districts are subject to chapters one, two and four, but not this subchapter.
Figure 1.1 B-3 District surrounding the Main Street Historic District
146
2
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
In this Subchapter: A. Mass and Scale G. Street Patterns
B. Building Quality H. Landscape Design
C. Building Roof Form I. Site Lighting
D. Site Design J. Utilities and Service Areas
E. Parking Facilities K. Site Furniture
F. Signs
147
3
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
A. Mass and Scale
Policy: The scale and character of the Main Street Historic District should be protected. The area
covered under this subchapter, should be able to accommodate compatible contemporary
development of greater height and density. Varied mass and scale along a streetscape and block is
inevitable and can contribute to a more interesting urban pattern that continues to evolve over
time.
1. Provide density to meet the goals and objectives of the Downtown Bozeman Improvement
Plan. .
• Floor area ratio for any new construction project shall be a minimum of 1.0 FAR.
Lower FAR ratios are acceptable with renovation or remodeling of existing
structures.
• Floor-to-floor heights for commercial and mixed use buildings shall be designed to
accommodate a variety of current and future uses. The first floor level of new
commercial and mixed use buildings shall maintain a minimum floor-to-floor height
of 15 feet.
• Buildings with 100 percent residential uses are exempt from the 15 foot floor-to-
floor height requirement but are encouraged to consider taller first floors to provide
flexibility for a variety of uses over time.
2. Innovative development and diversity of design is encouraged.
• Buildings and streetscapes should be of high quality and reflect a variety of
architectural styles.
• Decorative architectural adornment or other architectural patterns that convey a
false sense of historic period are discouraged.
• Buildings and additions should undergo a critical and rigorous design process by
design professionals that includes an emphasis on best practice designs to address
sustainable development.
• Innovative use of varied materials is encouraged.
3. A new building should exhibit clear order and comprehensive composition on all
elevations.
• Entire facades of a single surface are discouraged. A combination of materials and
articulation of building elements shall be expressed in the proposed architectural
character.
• Layering of design elements is encouraged.
• A clear narrative of the design process and intent and compliance with these
guidelines shall be included in the application. The narrative shall address these
guidelines and may propose alternative method(s) of compliance that clearly meet
the intent of these guidelines. Alternate proposals may be approved by the Director
of Community Development.
148
4
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
•
4.Building interface with residential zone properties.
•Building facades along alleys shall incorporate a variety of materials and incorporate
elements, including windows, to provide visual interest to minimize the massing and
scale of the building.
•Building sites that abut or are across an alley from a residential zone district shall be
sensitive to the interface where the properties meet by meeting the required
setback from the residentially zoned property and providing a transition zone.
o Along the interior side or rear property line, commencing at a vertical height
of 44 feet the building shall step back at an angle no greater than 45
degrees.
o Commercial zoned properties that abut residential zoned properties shall be
exempt from the step back and height transition zone requirements if: the
commercial and residential zoned lots are under unified ownership and are
being developed under a master site plan.
•Primary entries to buildings shall be clearly identifiable from the street.
•Large expanses of glass as a building façade treatment is discouraged.
5.Building Quality
Policy: New buildings shall be designed to a high level of permanence and quality.
1.New buildings shall be designed to the level of permanence and quality appropriate for
Downtown Bozeman.
2.Sustainable methods and techniques shall be applied to building design but also integrated
with site layout and infrastructure design.
C.Building Roof Form
Policy: Roof forms should be primarily flat roofs with other roof forms that fit to the architectural
character of the application.
1.Use flat roof lines as the primary roof form.
•Rooftop balconies and decks are encouraged.
•Green roofs are encouraged.
•Mechanical equipment should be located on the roof when feasible. Solar
applications are encouraged to screen other mechanical equipment.
149
5
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
2. The use of other roof forms.
• Depending on the architectural style and site context, a variety of other roof forms
may also be appropriate.
D. Site Design
Policy: All sites in downtown should be designed to make the experience of pedestrians and
bicyclists safe, comfortable and visually appealing.
1. Create strong connections between downtown’s sub-districts, and between downtown and
the surrounding neighborhoods.
• Place the facade of the building at the minimum front setback line except when
creating a public space.
• Commercial building facades along secondary (local) streets shall enhance the
pedestrian experience by providing street level facades with a minimum of 50%
transparent windows.
2. Public spaces should be made active through programming or utilizing opportunities with
adjacent uses that promote vitality and safety.
150
6
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
E. Parking Facilities Policy: Minimize the visual impacts of parking.
1. Enclosed parking, integrated into individual new buildings as well as additions (if feasible), is
preferred whenever possible to surface parking lots.
• Considerations should be given to both on-grade or subgrade options.
2. Shared parking structures are preferred to surface parking lots. A parking structure should
be designed so that it creates a visually attractive and active street edge.
• A parking structure in the area should enhance the streetscape by being
wrapped with commercial uses or another active use along the street edge to
separate the facility from the street and to add activity to the street.
• Other methods of accomplishing this include, but are not limited to
- Murals or public art
- Landscaping and urban plazas
3. For residential projects, enclosed parking is preferred to surface parking lots.
• If individual enclosed parking is provided, consider locating it in a garage accessed
internally or from an alley, when feasible.
151
7
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
• Locating enclosed parking on the front facade of a multi-household building is
inappropriate. Doing so may increase the perceived mass and scale of the structure
as a whole.
F. Signs
Policy: All signs should be designed to fit the overall context of the building and the district.
1. Commercial and Mixed Use projects should include a variety of creative and clear signage.
• Wall-mounted and projecting signs, as well as canopy and awning signs in some
circumstances are preferred.
• Directory signs support a pedestrian scale and are strongly encouraged where
appropriate.
• Artful, whimsical and creative signage is encouraged. A comprehensive sign plan may
be required; however, it is not intended to promote monotony.
2. Residential projects are encouraged to include building identification signage to add to
Bozeman’s overall sense of place.
• Wall-mounted signage is most appropriate.
• Artful, whimsical and creative signage is encouraged.
152
8
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
3. All signs should be developed with the overall context of the building and the area in mind. The
placement or location of a sign is a critical factor in maintaining the order and integrity of a
building. Consistent placement of signs according to building type, size, location and even building
materials creates a visual pattern that enhances the streetscape experience.
a. A flush-mounted or letter sign should be subordinate to the overall building composition.
• A sign should appear in scale with the facade.
• Locate a sign on a building such that it will emphasize design elements of the facade itself.
• Mount a sign to fit within existing architectural features.
• Use the shape of the sign to help reinforce the design elements of the building.
b. A window sign may be considered.
• A window sign may be painted on the glass or hung just inside a window.
c. A projecting sign, which projects from the building front, may be considered.
• A small hanging sign is easier for a pedestrian to read than other sign types and is
encouraged.
• A small hanging sign should be located near the entrance, just above the door or to the
side of it.
• A hanging sign should be mounted perpendicular with the building facade.
• A hanging sign should provide clearance between the sidewalk surface and the bottom of
the sign.
d. Awning and canopy signs may be considered.
• Consider a canopy or awning sign where a flush-mounted sign would obscure
architectural details.
e. A directory sign may be considered.
• Where several businesses share a building, coordinate the signs. Align several smaller
signs, or group them into a single panel as a directory.
• Use similar forms or backgrounds for the signs to tie them together visually and make
them easier to read.
f. A pole mounted or monument sign may be considered.
• A freestanding sign may be used in areas where buildings are primarily set back from the
street edge. For example, a freestanding sign may be used in the front yard of a residence
with an accessory commercial use.
• A monument sign may be used in areas where buildings are primarily set back from the
street edge.
g. Using a symbol for a sign is encouraged.
• A symbol sign adds interest to the street, can be read quickly and is remembered better
than written words.
153
9
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
G. Street Patterns
Policy: Historic settlement patterns seen in street and alley plans often contribute to the distinct
character of the downtown and therefore they should be preserved. These street plans influence
the manner in which primary structures are sited and they also shape the manner in which
landscape features may occur on the site.
Alleys
Policy: Alleys accommodate service functions and provide pedestrian connections and secondary vehicle
access. All alleys contribute to the character of the district.
1. The traditional scale and width of alleys should be continued.
Maintain the traditional character and scale of an alley by locating buildings and fences along
the alley edges to maintain the alley edge.
Streetscape
Policy: Maintain the character of the streetscape. This includes a rich collection of varying street designs,
sidewalk types and street trees.
Guidelines:
1. Maintain the variety of street paving designs.
2. Consider utilizing the variety of sidewalk designs.
• Where a detached (sidewalks separated from the street by a strip of grass) sidewalk exists, it
should be preserved.
154
10
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
• Where no sidewalk exists a new sidewalk is required; it should be constructed to be in
character with the traditional sidewalks in the neighborhood.
2. Use of planting strips is encouraged.
• Planting strips should act as a transition between public and semipublic spaces.
• Where planting strips between the curb and sidewalk exist they should be
maintained.
• If new detached sidewalks are installed new planting strips should be provided.
3. Continue the pattern of street trees in a block. Because street trees serve various aesthetic and
practical functions, they should be maintained.
• Existing street trees should be preserved, when feasible.
• If a new detached sidewalk is to be created, street trees should be an accompanying
feature.
• If a new sidewalk is to be installed, it should detour around mature street trees, when
feasible.
• When an existing street tree dies, it should be replaced.
• Any new developments should include street trees.
• The historic urban design character for street tree placement should be considered when
enforcing city street standards.
H. Landscape Design
Policy:
Landscaping enhances the built environment. Plant beds near and around building foundations and
along walkways are encouraged. Some sites may containing plantings that have historic significance and
should be retained, to the extent feasible. Some mature trees may also contribute to the historic
landscape and should be preserved.
Guidelines:
1. Preserve and maintain mature trees and significant vegetation that are a direct enhancement of the
pedestrian streetscape environment.
• Include existing vegetation as a part of a landscape design scheme where appropriate.
• In re-development areas, retention of healthy trees and vegetation clusters should be
given consideration for retention to the maximum extent possible, especially mature
trees, 6” or greater in diameter, and to vegetation clusters with significant visual impact.
I. Utilities and Service Areas
Policy: Service areas should be visually unobtrusive and should be integrated with the design of the site
and the building.
Guidelines:
1. Orient service entrances, waste disposal areas and other similar uses toward service lanes and away
from major streets.
155
11
NCOD Design Guidelines, Chapter 4-B
• Screen service entrances with walls, fences or plantings.
• When it will be visible from a public way, a service area screen should be in character with the
building and site it serves.
• Areas for outdoor storage, truck parking, trash collection or compaction loading, or other such uses
shall be located so as not to be visible from abutting streets.
2. Position service areas to minimize conflicts with other abutting uses.
• Minimize noise impacts by locating sources of offensive sounds away from other uses.
• Use an alley system to locate service areas, when feasible.
J. Site Furniture
Policy: Site furnishings, including bicycle racks, waste receptacles and light standards, are features of
contemporary life in Bozeman. Few of these elements appeared historically in the community and it is important
that the character of these elements not impede one’s ability to interpret the historic character of the area.
Guidelines:
1. Site furniture should be simple in character.
• Avoid any highly ornate design that would misrepresent the history of the area.
• Benches, bike racks and trash receptacles are examples of site furnishings that may be considered.
• In public open spaces within a project, trash and recycling receptacles should be placed near
seating areas and at points of entry.
156
76 Design Guidelines
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
Bon Ton
Cooper Park
Main Street
South Tracy/ South Black
Lindley Place
North Tracy Avenue
Story Mill
E MAIN ST
E LAMME ST N 5TH AVE N 3RD AVE W MAIN ST N ROUSE AVE E OLIVE ST
W KOCH ST N BLACK AVE N TRACY AVE N GRAND AVE W OLIVE ST S 6TH AVE S 4TH AVE W BEALL ST
W STORY ST
W PEACH ST PLUM AVE S BLACK AVE S TRACY AVE N CHURCH AVE S GRAND AVE W LAMME ST N WILLSON AVE IDA AVE W CURTISS ST
E MENDENHALL ST N BOZEMAN AVE N WALLACE AVE S CHURCH AVE W VILLARD ST
E BABCOCK ST S WILLSON AVE E STORY ST
W BABCOCK ST S 3RD AVE S BOZEMAN AVE E PEACH ST
W DICKERSON ST PERKINS PL W MENDENHALL ST N MONTANA AVE E BEALL ST
DAVIS ST N 4TH AVE BUTTONWOOD AVE S WALLACE AVE N BROADWAY AVE W SHORT ST N 6TH AVE S ROUSE AVE E VILLARD ST
E KOCH ST BRADY AVE E CURTISS ST
S 5TH AVE E SHORT ST BONNERLN
DAVIS ST
E PEACH ST Updated MapResolution4598
Revised:
This map was created by theCity of BozemanDepartment of Planningand Community Development
¯
1 inch = 600 feet
Intended for Planning purposes onlysome layers may not line up properly.
Zoning Designation
B-3
Historic Districts
Conservation Overlay
179
Zoning Commission
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 6:00 PM
City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 06:01:42 PM (00:00:01)Call meeting to order
Present Were:
• Jordan Zignego
• George Thompson
• Erik Garberg (Chair)
• Commissioner Chris Mehl
• Julien Morice
B. 06:01:49 PM (00:00:08) Changes to the Agenda
C. 06:02:33 PM (00:00:52) Approve Joint Meeting Minutes
(Previously approved by Planning Board)
• 06-06-17 Minutes (pdf)
o 06-06-17 Video
• 06-27-17 Minutes (pdf)
o 06-27-17 Video
• 07-11-17 Minutes (pdf)
o 07-11-17 Video
• 07-18-17 Minutes (pdf)-
o 07-18-17 Video
MOTION to approve minutes: George Thompson
MOTION SECONDED: Jordan Zignego
VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries
D. 06:02:45 PM (00:01:04) Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an
audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on
matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in
conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit
your comments to three minutes.
180
E. Action Items 1. 06:03:16 PM (00:01:35)
17-399 Ordinance 1981: B-3 design guidelines (Matsen) An ordinance of the city commission of the city of Bozeman, Montana to affirm and readopt the inclusion of Subchapter 4B to the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) Design Guidelines previously adopted pursuant to City Commission Resolution 4598 (May 18, 2015).
• Staff Report
• Amending Resolution 4323
06:06:07 PM (00:04:26) Matsen summarized the amending resolution 4323 as the transition
language of 4B so that if someone owns both sides of a property, they are not required to
‘transition against themselves’.
06:07:58 PM (00:06:17) Commissioner Mehl asked if this resolution was adopted, whether it
would apply to the new B3 and the map exhibit. Matsen clarified that the resolution 4598,
which is currently in place, refers to a map in the document, but the text refers to all B3
zoned properties. There is some discrepancy in the current document, but the standard
policies states that text outweighs illustration. Matsen stated that the map offers
clarification.
06:09:12 PM (00:07:31) Public Comment:
Randy Peters (2607 Springcreek Dr.) commented that changing the game for developers was
at the expense of adjacent neighbors and properties. He argued that the neighborhood
residents did not understand 4598 & subchapter 4B until the Black Olive project came
about. He thought that this was a good opportunity to review and recommend changes to
the 4B guidelines. He asked that the board allow enough time for business hours and
community members to participate in the re-adoption.
06:13:05 PM (00:11:24) Chris Shada (621 N. Bozeman) commented that he had reviewed the
4B and NCOD guidelines in addition to the municipal ordinances. He stated that there are
21 properties on the B3 side of any transition line and 27 properties that are on the
residential side of any transition block. He was concerned that the document did not refer
to ‘block character’ at any point. He also stated that he could not see that 4B allowed
anything to be developed that wasn’t already possible and suggested removing the section
altogether.
06:40:46 PM (00:39:05) Alan Kirk (227 E. Olive St.) commented on the fact that the block
characteristic and street scape issues were removed from the NCOD in 2015 and he felt it
was without adequate public comment. He asked the committee to reserve time for public
181
comment on the NCOD issues with respect to block character and streetscape, in particular
with regard to setback issues with some of the proposed high rise or mid-rise buildings
being proposed for the halo district as is currently proposed in the UDC update which will be
adopted with a hearing and a vote. He stated that he felt there should be adequate setbacks
for adjacent residents to enjoy their property. He asked for a function which would be half
of the height of the adjacent wall as they do in Boulder, CO.
MOTION having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment and all
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application
17399 and move to recommend the city commission affirm and re-adopt resolution 4598 which
adopted subchapter 4B, design guidelines for commercial development within the
neighborhood conservation overlay district, specifically the B3 halo including the amendments
incorporated into the subchapter 4B by resolution 4623 regarding an exemption from the
setback and height transition policies of abutting commercially zoned and residentially zoned
lots are under unified ownership and are being developed under a master site plan into the
design guidelines for the neighborhood conservation overlay district : George Thompson
MOTION SECONDED: Jordan Zignego
06:17:42 PM (00:16:01) DISCUSSION:
Board member Thompson addressed block characteristics and how they fit with maximizing
zoning allowances in the B3 perimeter edges of providing a cohesive design from commercial
districts to smaller scaled residential. He stated that there was a lot of merit in having some
type of action that addresses stepping down some modifications to address adjacent parcels.
Thompson stated that he supported this amendment.
06:19:05 PM (00:17:24) Board member Julien Morice asked for clarification in what is being
asked of the board for this ordinance. Garberg clarified by stating that the board is reaffirming
the initial changes to the 4B and adding a subsequent change to address exemption from the
transition requirements for parcels owned by the same owner.
06:19:56 PM (00:18:15) Matsen offered further clarification stating that there was question as
to whether the 4B ordinance was properly noticed the first time it was adopted. He stated that
they are doing this to make sure that there is no question in the adoption process for the NCOD.
He said that there was no changes to the text, but they wanted to affirm the changes that were
previously made with Ordinance 4623, which was added after the original adoption of the
resolution. Matsen added that regardless of the actions taken by the board, these ordinances
are already part of our code.
06:21:45 PM (00:20:04) Commissioner Mehl added that the commission started reviewing this
in Dec. 2014 and that there were several meetings in that adoption through the spring. The
ordinance was sent to the Historic Advisory Preservation Board, but it had not gone to the
Zoning board. Due to legal issues that have risen, the city decided to re-notice the project to go
above and beyond to provide clarity. Mehl added that if the board sees problems and did not
want to move forward with the re-adoption, to vote against the motion.
182
VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries Unanimously 4-0
06:25:14 PM (00:23:33) There will be more opportunity for public comment on this issue at the
Commission meeting to be held on September 18th. 4B will also be reviewed at two additional
advisory boards, which were previously noticed. 2. 06:25:49 PM (00:24:08)
17-304 Ordinance 1976: B-2M Parking Requirements (Fine) An ordinance of the city commission of the city of Bozeman, Montana amending chapter 38, unified development code, section 38.25.040 to set minimum off-street parking requirements for the B-2m district.
• Staff Report
• Application
• Ordinance No. 1976 (Draft)
• City Commission Minutes 5/1/2017
06:26:31 PM (00:24:50) David Fine from Bozeman’s Economic Development division
provided some background on B-2M zoning, a new type of zoning created in 2016. This
zone can be applied anywhere in the city with the proper land use designation, but is
currently only found in the core of the community along the 7th Ave corridor. They had
received feedback that the standard city parking standards were a barrier to development
in the compact urban development zones.
06:30:05 PM (00:28:24) Fine summarized the proposed parking changes for B-2M,
eliminating minimum off-street parking requirements. The proposed parking
requirements would allow off-site parking within 1000 sq. ft. of the development for
commercial and multiple household dwellings. The maximums that would be applied are
actually the minimum parking requirements elsewhere.
06:33:17 PM (00:31:36) Board member Thompson asked about shared parking. Fine
explained that there are existing conditions in the Muni Code that allow applicants to do a
parking study and seek an alternative parking arrangement through the approval of the
Director of Community Development. An applicant can accept the simplified parking
requirements that are being proposed, or seek alternative options that currently exist.
06:34:59 PM (00:33:18) Commissioner Mehl confirmed that bike parking requirements
would remain the same. Fine explained that both Missoula and Billings do not have
minimum parking requirements in their downtown corridors.
06:36:13 PM (00:34:32) Public Comment
183
Chris Shada (621 N. Bozeman) commented that he supported density and encouraged
more vibrancy in the city. He stated that he thought they should reduce parking
requirements in every case as much as possible.
06:39:04 PM (00:37:23) Board member Julien Morice recused himself from both agenda
items as he is involved in projects that are a conflict of interest.
MOTION having reviewed and considered the application materials, public comment and all
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application
17304 and move to recommend approval of this text amendment: George Thompson
MOTION SECONDED: Jordan Zignego
VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries 3-0, noting abstention of Julien Morice
F. FYI/Discussion
G. 06:45:36 PM (00:43:55) Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.net
This board generally meets the first and third Tuesday of the month at 6:00pm
Zoning Commission meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and
require assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-
2301).
184
Joint City Planning Board and Zoning Commission
Tuesday, August 15th, 2017 7:00 PM
City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 07:02:53 PM (01:01:12) Call meeting to order
Present Were:
• John Lavey (PB)
• Henry Happel (PB)
• George Thompson (PB/ZC)
• Chair Erik Garberg (ZC)
• Jerry Pape (PB)
• Paul Spitler (PB)
• Lauren Waterton (PB)
B. 07:03:34 PM (01:01:53) Changes to the Agenda
C. 07:03:40 PM (01:01:59) Approve Joint Meeting Minutes (none)
D. 07:03:46 PM (01:02:05) Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an
audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on
matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in
conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit
your comments to three minutes.
07:04:17 PM (01:02:36) Staff Liaison, Planner Tom Rogers introduced the newest Planning Board
member, John Lavey.
E. 07:04:04 PM (01:02:23) Action Items
1. 17381 Affordable Housing & Condominiums Text Amendment (Matsen)
The proposed amendments will alter Article 38.43, Affordable Housing. These amendments, if
adopted, would make the requirements of Article 38.43 not applicable to condominium units.
• 17381 Staff Report
• Draft Ordinance 1980
185
07:05:38 PM (01:03:57) Director of Community Development, Martin Matsen clarified that the
Affordable Housing ordinance calls out condominiums specifically, but there is a discrepancy in
that there are few ways to satisfy the ordinance when dealing with a condominium
development.
He stated that the developer would have to build a town home or a single family detached unit
on the same site as the condominiums since they alone cannot satisfy the ordinance. The
alternative is to pay cash in lieu, but that the cash in lieu specifics are to be determined at a later
time.
The recommendation to the City Commission is to fix the definitions so that condominiums do
not trigger the requirements of the ordinance and come back at a later time with a fully formed
revision that would specify how condominiums would satisfy the Affordable Housing ordinance.
He stated that with how condominiums are financed and the associated fees that can come with
them, it is not realistic for them to be considered affordable in many cases. He stated that he
has seen condominium fees exempt in affordable units, but that this was not something that
could be dealt with immediately with the new ordinance. He also argued that market rate
condominiums are some of the only products that are hitting the affordable housing price points
on their own. This ordinance as is could stifle projects that could be contributing to affordable
housing.
07:09:54 PM (01:08:13) Matsen stated that this is a text amendment that would prevent condos
from triggering the affordable housing and in the next few months bring back to the board how
they would deal with condominiums and rental units in the affordable housing objective. The
current inclusionary ordinance deals with single family homes, solely.
The recommendation from staff is to approve the text amendment.
07:13:24 PM (01:11:43) Board member Jerry Pape voiced concerns regarding unintended
consequences in removing condominiums from the affordable housing ordinance such as an un-
proportional mix being developed. Matsen responded by saying the current ordinance comes
into play at the Subdivision step of the development process. His prediction was that they’ll see
smaller subdivisions, under the minimum number of units, and more rentals to avoid the
ordinance.
07:19:56 PM (01:18:15) Board member Spitler asked whether this amendment would simply
strike condos from the affordable housing ordinance or if it was possible to add them to the
ordinance? Matsen responded that the controls on the backside need to be modified so that
condos are affordable overall – his concern was that the price would be affordable, but that fees
would undo that. He continued by saying that the condos are currently the most affordable
option and that he did not want to deter development by adding them to the ordinance
prematurely.
186
07:22:33 PM (01:20:52) Board member Happel asked Matsen why they did not simply add
condos under the section that states that developments comprised exclusively of rental units
are exempt from the affordable housing ordinance. Matsen responded by stating that there are
condos that are single family, detached units. Their goal was to specify a market rate unit vs. a
non-market rate unit.
07:27:13 PM (01:25:32) Matsen clarified by stating that the affordable units (condos) are
marginally beneficial to the people buying them unless you’re looking at a significant length of
time. Without controls on fees, etc. it removes the incentives for those who are purchasing the
units.
07:28:47 PM (01:27:06) Public Comment
MOTION to approve 17381 as presented: Jerry Pape
MOTION SECONDED: Paul Spitler
Planning Board VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries Unanimously 6-0
F. 07:30:55 PM (01:29:14) FYI/Discussion
Board member Pape encouraged board members to meet with Director Matsen to continue
general discussion concerning Planning Board and Zoning Commission.
G. 07:31:44 PM (01:30:03) Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.netThis board
generally meets the first and third Tuesday of the month at 7:00pm
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
187
City Planning Board
Tuesday, September 5th, 2017 7:00 PM
City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 07:32:14 PM (01:30:33) Call meeting to order
Present Were:
• Jordan Zignego
B. 07:32:20 PM (01:30:39) Changes to the Agenda
C. Minutes (none)
D. 07:32:32 PM (01:30:51) Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an
audible tone of voice for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on
matters falling within the purview of the Committee. There will also be an opportunity in
conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item. Please limit
your comments to three minutes.
E. Action Items
1. 07:33:07 PM (01:31:26) Growth Policy (Saunders)
Introduction to the consultants assisting with data collection for the growth
policy. Presentation and discussion on national and local trends identified to date.
• Materials
Director Matsen let the board know that the Growth Policy update scheduled for this
meeting occurred in the previous meeting, so there are no updates to report.
Board member Waterton let the board know that there would be a Growth Policy update at
the following meeting.
2. 07:34:39 PM (01:32:58) Election of officers to replace the Chair.
Board member Pape suggested that the position of chair be offered to the current board
members via email.
MOTION to elect Henry Happel as Chair of the board: Lauren Waterton
MOTION SECONDED: Paul Spitler
Discussion: Board member Thompson stated that if they were to circulate emails that he
would offer himself as a candidate.
188
Waterton stated that she made the motion so that elections were held in a public setting.
Pape clarified that with respect to the email, they would be sent to the staff liaison in order
to meet disclosure requirements. He was concerned that they would hear the majority of
the quorum present, not the majority of the board.
Happel stated that the board members were aware of what was being voted on and that it
was a choice whether or not to be present for the meeting. He suggested that they move
forward with a vote.
VOTE: All in Favor – Motion Carries
F. 07:40:21 PM (01:38:40) FYI/Discussion
Board member Pape asked if September 11th is the first consideration for the UDC. Director
Matsen responded by saying he could not answer at this time due to a motion that has not been
voted on being on the table. He stated that the UDC is tentatively on the agenda for September
11th.
Pape continued by suggesting that a board representative be present at the Commission
meetings regarding the UDC update.
G. Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.net
This board generally meets the first and third Tuesday of the month at 7:00pm
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
189
190
PO Box 4836
Bozeman, Montana 59772
www.ARCHtrio.com
317 - 917 – 9042
A Women Business Enterprise
September 12, 2017
PUBLIC COMMENT
RE: Re-affirming and re-adopting the 2015 B-3 Commercial Design Guidelines as part of the NCOD
Dear Members of the Bozeman Historic Preservation Advisory Board (BHPAB):
I am pleased to hear this board’s position is being sought by the City Commission and Staff regarding
the reaffirmation of the B-3 Guidelines adopted as an amendment to the NCOD Guidelines back in
2015. The input of this board is very important to this critical decision.
I ask you to please consider the following:
The added language to address concerns regarding the B-3 zoned area wrapping the Main Street
National Register Historic District was a very limited process with little public input or thorough
understanding of the potential ramifications to the surrounding historic buildings and remaining
historic context.
Changes within this highly significant area are very important and have the potential to have
significant impact on various historic districts and individual resources.
Public participation in a process should be encouraged by including the DRB, BHPAB,
leadership from various impacted historic districts, and others, in the development of
appropriate, well considered and vetted guidelines.
As a co-writer of the NCOD analysis prepared a couple of years ago, I would encourage the
BHPAB to revisit the recommendations provided in that document and propose a game plan and
timeline for implementing the best and most appropriate ideas. The Design Guidelines are
included.
Parking issues as a result of the recent B-3 Guidelines can be fixed - parking garages built, and
new public transportation implemented. The hardest, most detrimental, and most challenging
impact of the re-affirmed B-3 Guidelines will be the impact on the overall historic context of the
downtown.
191
B-3 Comment
September 12, 2017
Page 2
This is by no means a suggestion that development is bad. I am all for appropriate development as long
as it doesn’t have a negative impact on individually significant historic buildings or neighborhoods (and
this doesn’t necessarily limit the definition to buildings or districts that are already listed on the National
Register of Historic Places, we need to also consider those resources which are potentially eligible). I
have the seen the results of hasty demolition. I have seen the negative impact of inappropriate design.
Once the historic fabric and the cultural context is lost, it is gone forever.
Bozeman is a perfect example for understanding the architectural progression of styles and history. The
architecture embodied in the designs of Fred Willson demonstrate that a variety of styles and buildings
scales can co-exist successfully. His use of materials and details and scale and massing reflect a
sensitivity to the context in which he designed and built. His work and the work of others creates a rich
melding called character.
We must capture that essence in our design guidelines so that we may continue to responsibly address
our local historic assets, encourage innovative, compatible new design and continue the tradition of a
rich community character. This is hard work and requires everyone’s best thinking in a collaborative
approach.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Patricia L. Jacobs
Principal/Architect
ARCHitecture trio, Inc.
CC: Design Review Board
City Commissioners
Martin Matsen, Director of Community Developement
192