HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-17-18 City Commission Packet Materials - A2. Maple Terrace Zone Map AmendmentPage 1 of 18
18217, Staff Report for the Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment
Public Hearing Date:
Zoning Commission: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 (continued to August 21, 2018)
City Commission: Monday, August 20, 2018 (continued to September 17, 2018)
Project Description: A Zone Map Amendment application requesting amendment of the
City Zoning Map to rezone .67 gross acres / 29,210 square feet from R-1 Residential Low
Density to R-O Residential Office as allowed by Section 38.260.100 of the Bozeman
Municipal Code.
Project Location: The property is generally located north of Durston Road and east of N. 19th
Avenue and is legally described as Lots 25 and 26, Block A of Maple Terrace Subdivision, and
the adjacent Montana Department of Transportation right-of-way & right-of-way acquisition,
said tracts being located in the Southwest One-Quarter of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 5
East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana.
Recommendation: Approval
City Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff
report, application materials, public comment, the Zoning Commission recommendation,
and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for
application 18217 and move to recommend approval of the Maple Terrace zone map
amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing.
Report Date: September 6, 2018
Staff Contact: Addi Jadin, Associate Planner
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unresolved Issues
None identified at this time.
Project Summary
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the requested amendment to the City of Bozeman
Zoning Map proposed by the property owners, applicant and the project representative listed in
Appendix D. The applicants request rezoning of 2 lots and corresponding portions of street right-
of-way totaling approximately .67 acres (gross) from R-1 Residential Low Density District to R-
O Residential Office. The subject properties are currently vacant and are surrounded by
18
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 2 of 18
administrative professional and single-household residential uses. The future land use map in the
Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the properties as residential.
The criteria for analysis is in Section 4 of the staff report. In considering the criteria the
analysis must show that the proposed amendment accomplishes criteria A-D or are
neutral. Criteria E-K must be considered and may be found to be affirmative, neutral, or
negative. A favorable decision on the proposed application must find that the application
meets all of criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh
negative outcomes for criteria E-K.
As stated in Section 38.300.020.C. placement of any given zoning district on an area
depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of
uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a
guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate
review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and
development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and
ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a
commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.
Public comment regarding the zone map amendment application is summarized in
Appendix B and attached to the staff report. As of the completion of the staff report, no
written protest from property owners within 150 feet has been received; however,
individuals present at the Planning and Zoning Commission indicated their intent to
protest.
Alternatives
1. Recommend approval of the application with contingencies as presented;
2. Recommend denial of the application based on findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report;
3. Recommend approval of a different residential district after making the necessary findings
for the action; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to
supply additional information or to address specific items.
19
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 3 of 18
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 1
Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT..... 6
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 6
SECTION 4 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............. 7
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria (38.100.040.C. UDC) ...................................... 7
SPOT ZONING CRITERIA ................................................................................................... 13
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 14
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND .............. 15
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 15
APPENDIX C - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ................... 16
APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF............................ 18
FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 18
ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 18
20
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 4 of 18
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES
Current Zoning Map
21
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 5 of 18
Community Plan Future Land Use Map
22
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 6 of 18
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT
Please note that these contingencies are necessary for the City to complete the process of the
proposed amendment.
Recommended Contingencies of Approval:
1. That all documents and exhibits necessary to establish an initial municipal zoning
designation shall be identified as the “2018 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment.”
2. That the applicant must submit a Zone Amendment map, titled “2018 Maple Terrace
Zone Map Amendment”. The map must be supplied on: 1) a mylar for City records
(either 18" by 24" or 24” by 36” size); 2) a reduced 8 ½" x 11" or 8 ½” by 14" exhibit for filing with the Annexation Agreement at the County Clerk & Recorder; 3) an editable digital copy for the City Engineer’s Office; and 4) a PDF. This map must be acceptable to the City Engineer’s Office, and must be submitted within 60 days of the
action to approve the zone map amendment. Said map shall contain a metes and
bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent right-of-ways or street easements, and total acreage of the property to be rezoned; unless the property to be rezoned can be entirely described by reference to existing platted properties or certificates of survey.
3. The Ordinance for the zone map amendment shall not be drafted until the applicant
provides an editable metes and bounds legal description prepared by a licensed
Montana surveyor.
4. All required materials shall be provided to the Department of Community
Development within 60 days of a favorable action of the City Commission or any
approval shall be null and void.
SECTION 3 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff recommends
approval as submitted. The Development Review Committee (DRC) considered the
amendment on June 20, 2018. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory
constraints that would impede the approval of the application.
The Zoning Commission continued this item at their meeting on July 17, 2018 and held a
public hearing on this zone map amendment on August 21, 2018, at 121 N. Rouse Avenue,
Bozeman. The Zoning Commission voted 3:1 in favor of forwarding a recommendation of
approval to the City Commission. Audio and video recording of the meeting are available
via the City of Bozeman website (www.bozeman.net/services/city-tv-and-streaming-audio).
The City Commission was scheduled to hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment
on August 20, 2018. However, the Commission continued the item, as requested by the
applicant, until September 17, 2018 at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will
begin at 6 p.m.
23
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 7 of 18
SECTION 4 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for plan approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a
legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The
burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant.
In considering the criteria the analysis must show that the amendment accomplishes criteria
A-D or are neutral. Criteria E-K must be considered and may be found to be affirmative,
neutral, or negative. A favorable decision on the proposed application must find that the
application meets all of criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the amendment
outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria (38.100.040.C. UDC)
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Yes. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates
the subject properties as residential. The intent of the R-O zoning district aligns with the
description of residential in the growth policy (see Appendix C of the staff report).
Residential-Office is an implementing zoning district for the Residential future land use
classification as shown in Table C-16 of the growth policy. Having the underlying
Residential future land use classification restricts the scope of allowed non-residential uses in
the R-O zoning district.
Additionally, the proposed zone map amendment advances multiple objectives of the growth
policy:
Land Use Objective 1.1: “The land use map and attendant policies shall be the official
guide for the development of the City and shall be implemented through zoning
regulations, capital improvements, subdivision regulations, coordination with other
governmental entities, and other implementation strategies.”
Land Use Objective 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.”
Land Use Objective 2.3: “Encourage redevelopment and intensification, especially
with mixed uses, of brownfields and underutilized property within the City consistent
with the City’s adopted standards. Using this approach rehabilitate corridor based
commercial uses into a pattern more supportive of the principles supported by
commercial centers.”
24
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 8 of 18
Community Quality Objective 1.3: “Support compatible infill within the existing area
of the City rather than developing land requiring expansion of the City’s area.”
Housing Objective 1.1 “Encourage and support the creation of a broad range of
housing types in proximity to services and transportation options.”
See also discussion under Criteria G & H. No conflicts with the Growth Policy have been
identified.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Yes. The subject properties are currently within the jurisdiction of the City of Bozeman Fire
and Police Departments and within the service area of American Medical Response
ambulances. The proposed amendment of the zoning map is not likely to adversely impact
safety from fire and other dangers as any changes in use and further development would be
reviewed under the Unified Development Code (UDC). Development standards of the UDC
have been found to adequately address this criterion. All structures within the City are also
required to comply with adopted building codes which further address this issue.
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes. The proposed amendment will promote general welfare by implementing the future land
use map in the Bozeman Community Plan. Future site development will be required to be in
compliance with the UDC which will help assure general health, safety, and welfare. The
proposed amendment will not put undue burden on municipal services, emergency response
capability, or similar existing requirements.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public requirements.
Neutral. Future site development proposals on the subject property will be required to
demonstrate the adequate provision of all public services including those that may be
necessary to offset any impacts that may be identified throughout the review process.
The review procedures and standards adopted by the City ensure this criterion is met. These
standards will apply to development of the site under any zoning district.
As stated in Section 38.300.020.C, placement of any given zoning district on an area
depicted on the zoning map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of
uses allowed within that district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a
guarantee of approval for any given use prior to the completion of the appropriate
review procedure and compliance with all of the applicable requirements and
development standards of this chapter and other applicable policies, laws and
25
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 9 of 18
ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate infrastructure availability or a
commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of extending services.
Evaluation of zone map amendments are high level consideration of generally appropriate
development patterns. The City has adopted extensive site development review processes as
part of its zoning regulations. These processes ensure that detailed, site and project specific,
evaluations occur along with any necessary mitigation to meet adopted standards before any
development approval is given.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Yes. With the setbacks, open space, landscaping and building design requirements of the
UDC, adequate light and air is expected to be provided in the event that future development
occurs along the zone edge boundary. No height transition was deemed necessary between
R-O and R-1 lots. See Appendices A and C for additional analysis of the R-O zoning
district.
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Yes. The Bozeman Area Transportation Master Plan (TMP) (2017) classifies the adjacent
and nearby roadways surrounding the subject property as Principal Arterial (North 19th
Avenue), Minor Arterial (Durston Road), and Local (North 17th Avenue). North 19th Ave has
an existing volume to capacity ratio of 0.78 and 0.59 (east) and 0.68 (west) for Durston Road,
Page 42, TMP Figure 2.9. A value less than 1 indicates remaining capacity in the street. Any
changes in traffic with development under the R-O or R-1 zoning designation will be
reviewed at the time of further development on the subject parcels. Development of the area
may be limited until street improvements have been completed. Given the area being
considered for rezoning and the limited intensity allowed under the R-O zone the amount of
additional travel demand is a small possible percentage of the total available capacity.
Improvements to Durston Road and the greater transportation system may be required
through future site specific development review starting with the dedication of right-of-way
for collector streets to allow for the expansion of the westbound right-turn bay as described
in City’s long range master plan, Page 84, TSM-30. The TMP identifies the intersection of
North 19th Ave and Durston Road are currently operating with a level-of-service (LOS) of
“C” for both AM and PM peak-hours, which is acceptable by the City. The TMP notes that
the intersection will fail during PM peak-hour conditions in the future, with the
aforementioned expansion to the west-bound right-turn bay suggested to mitigate for the
future condition. This will occur with or without the change in zoning and will involve City
acquisition of additional right-of-way for widening of Durston Road to address increased
travel demand. In addition, the City’s capital improvement plan calls for the reconstruction
26
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 10 of 18
of North 17th Avenue, scheduled for FY22 to bring the street up to the City’s local street
standard and install upgraded utility mains.
Parking is also a part of the transportation system and under the proposed R-O zoning further
development will be carefully evaluated to ensure that proposed development does not create
negative impacts on adjacent properties from spillover parking.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Yes. The Growth Policy supports infill development on vacant and underutilized properties.
The proposed change of zoning for the subject properties will enable the currently
undeveloped land to be developed in a manner compatible with surrounding development
patterns. In addition, the properties are surrounded by both commercial and residential uses;
as a result, land uses that are of a mixed-use nature are an appropriate extension of the
current urban growth patterns. When considering this criterion, the City is guided by the
following adopted definitions in 38.700.040. Evaluation of these definitions against the
adopted review criteria occurs during the site development review process when detailed
proposals are made and the exact scope of impact can be identified.
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 non-motorized transportation, and
open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or
monotony of architectural or site design, density or use.
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.
The primary use of a lot within the R-O zoning district is determined by the underlying
growth policy land use designation. Where the district lies over a residential growth policy
designation, as it does on the subject parcels, the primary use shall be non-office uses where
the primary use shall be measured by percentage of building floor area. This will ensure that
the future development is compatible with the adjacent low-density residential development.
27
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 11 of 18
H. Character of the district.
Yes. Character of the district includes the types of uses allowed, size, scale and design of
buildings and lots, the residential density, and other factors.
As previously mentioned in item G above, the ratio of residential to commercial uses allowed
on the subject parcels is determined by the underlying growth policy land use designation.
Because the underlying designation for the subject parcels is “residential”, any development
on these lots must be more than 50% residential. Whereas on the R-O lots adjacent to the
subject parcels, the underlying growth policy designation is “business park” and those lots
are allowed to be more commercial. The proposal would potentially allow a more subtle
transition from commercial to residential than currently exists between R-O lots and R-1 lots
within the district. The R-O area along 19th Avenue which is part of the Maple Terrace
subdivision has been designated as R-O since at least the mid-1990’s as shown on the City’s
zoning map archive. Therefore, R-O is part of the developed character of the area.
Another aspect of the character is the intensity of use as measured by residential density. The
current minimum density in the R-1 zoning district is 5 dwelling units per net acre; whereas
R-O zoning requires a minimum of 6 dwellings per acre. Under its current development
pattern with 26 single-household lots, 5 administrative professional and 7 vacant lots within
10.3 net acres, the Maple Terrace Subdivision has a density of approximately 2.5 dwellings
per net acre. Including roughly the same area of land south of the proposal under R-2
zoning, the current density is still below the minimum R-1 density of 5 dwelling units per
acre at approximately 4.74 units per acre. The area is not meeting the intent as stated in the
R-1 district of providing urban density.
The lot sizes in the Maple Terrace subdivision are large and would support additional of
accessory dwelling units on each residential lot or potentially additional full homes through
sketch plan reviews. No change in zoning district is required to allow this to occur.
Therefore, the character of the existing district allows for substantial intensification within
the area even in the absence of this zoning amendment.
Typically, building size, scale and design are thought of as the character of the district. R-O
zoning does allow heights about 10 feet taller than R-1; however, when adopting zone edge
transition standards of Section 38.320.060, the transition between R-O and R-1 districts was
not included. This represents a legislative determination that the difference between the scale
and intensity of the two districts does not require extraordinary mitigation.
One area where the character of the R-O lot may be different from that of the adjacent
residential properties is parking. Whereas parking requirements for residential units on R-O
lots are the same in R-1, the likelihood of a need for a parking lot is greater in R-O. Due to
zoning requirements, the parking lot is likely to be in the rear or potentially along the side of
28
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 12 of 18
the existing lots. This is not typical in the residential districts. It would however be
mitigated by landscaping requirements and potentially by open space and storm water
facilities if placed within the setbacks.
See additional comments in Criterion G.
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Yes. The subject properties are peculiarly suitable for the proposed R-O uses. The intent of
the R-O zoning district is to provide a transition area between residential neighborhoods and
commercial areas. The subject parcels fall between existing R-O, R-1 and R-2 uses. A
change to R-O zoning would conform to adjacent zoning, implement the Bozeman
Community Plan, and provide for further development of residential with associated office
land uses which is suitable for the area as that is the current development pattern.
The location of the properties with frontage solely along an arterial street and near an
intersection with a collector is particularly suitable for an increase in intensity. Non-
residential uses are likely to find the visual exposure along an arterial street more beneficial
than single detached homes.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Yes. All future site development that complies with the requirements outlined in the
UDC will ensure consistency with the existing and planned surrounding development types
which will, in turn, aid in the conservation of surrounding property values. Standards to be
reviewed include impacts to traffic, building height, open space, landscaping, pedestrian
connectivity, building design (including Block Frontage for commercial and 5-household
residential). As a result, the proposed amendment is not likely to negatively impact the value
of existing buildings.
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Yes. The proposed zone map amendment would allow the subject property to be developed
in a manner consistent with surrounding development patterns and provide an appropriate
transition between adjacent uses. The proposed amendment is suitable for the site and can
benefit from and add to the commercial and residential nature of the surrounding area. The
growth policy supports development on underutilized parcels and the proposed amendment
would provide for that.
29
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 13 of 18
SPOT ZONING CRITERIA Rezoning may, in certain factual circumstances, constitute impermissible “spot zoning.” The issue of whether a rezoning constitutes spot zoning was discussed by the Montana Supreme Court in Plains Grains LP v. Board of County Comm’rs of Cascade County and Little v. Bd. Of County Comm’rs, in which the Court determined that the presence of all of the following three conditions generally will indicate that a given situation constitutes spot zoning, regardless of variations in factual scenarios.
1. Is the proposed use significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area? No. The proposed use will serve as a transition between adjacent R-O properties to the west that are predominantly commercial and the R-1 and R-2 properties adjacent in other directions. Because the underlying growth policy for the subject properties is “residential” the property must have more floor area dedicated to residential than allowed non-residential uses. While higher residential density would be permitted, the proposed zoning designation would not result in primary uses of the site which are significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area. The area to be changed is physically adjacent to an existing R-O zoned area, also within the Maple Terrace subdivision. The R-O area along 19th Avenue, which is
part of the Maple Terrace subdivision, has been designated as R-O since at least the
mid-1990’s as shown on the City’s zoning map archive. Therefore, R-O is part of the
developed character and prevailing land uses of the area.
2. Is the area requested for the rezone rather small in terms of the number of separate
landowners benefited from the proposed change? The proposed R-O zoning designation is being requested by three landowners and would apply to two lots totaling .67 acres. The proposed R-O zoning designation is not anticipated to directly benefit surrounding landowners unless a place of employment were to be located on the rezoned lots. However, as discussed above, no substantial negative impacts have been identified due to this amendment. The site is geographically small but is at an existing R-O/R-1 zoning boundary. The two lots are adjacent to an area of the same zoning designation. The adjacent R-O area is large and shares two borders with the R-1 district where this amendment will occur. The R-O area spans both sides of 19th Avenue and from Durston to Oak Street.
3. Would the change be in the nature of “special legislation” designed to benefit only
one or a few landowners at the expense of the surrounding landowners or the
general public?
30
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 14 of 18 No. While the number of landowners who will directly benefit from the proposed zone map amendment is small, the proposed amendment is not at the expense of surrounding landowners or the general public. As discussed above in the various review criteria, no substantial negative impacts have been identified due to this amendment. When looking at the City as a whole, Bozeman is in need of additional housing to meet increased demand for a variety of housing options. The proposed R-O zoning designation will allow for a greater array of housing options in an infill area. In this sense, the proposed zoning designation will help address Bozeman’s need for greater housing options and will thereby benefit the community as a whole.
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS
IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A
PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT 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
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.
As of the issuance of the staff report, the Clerk and Recorders Office has not received written
protest. At the Planning and Zoning Commission hearing, property owners indicated their intent
to protest.
31
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 15 of 18
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the requested amendment to the City of Bozeman
Zoning Map proposed by the property owners and applicant listed in Appendix D.
The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the requested amendment to the City of Bozeman
Zoning Map proposed by the property owners, applicant and the project representative listed in
Appendix D. The applicants request rezoning of 2 lots and corresponding portions of street right-
of-way totaling approximately .67 acres (gross) from R-1 Residential Single-Household Low
Density District to R-O Residential Office. The subject properties are currently vacant and are
surrounded by administrative professional and single-household residential uses. The future land
use map in the Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the properties as residential.
Certain development standards and authorized uses that may be applicable to the subject
parcels differ between R-1 and R-O zoning. Floor area ratio is significantly higher in R-
O zoning at 1.5:1 versus .5:1 in R-1. R-O buildings are generally allowed an additional
10 feet of height for various roof forms. R-O uses include higher density residential
buildings, lodging houses, Type 2 short term rentals, and offices including medical.
Setbacks are the same and density requirements per net acre only differ by 1 dwelling
unit.
Setbacks, open space, landscaping and building design requirements of the UDC are
intended to ensure adequate light and air; thus conserving the value of existing
buildings.
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was sent via US 1st Class mail on Friday, June 29, 2018 to all owners of property located
inside the proposed change and within 200 feet of the perimeter of the change. The project site
was posted prior to July 1, 2018. Notice was published in the Legal Ads section of the Bozeman
Daily Chronicle on July 1 and July 8, 2018.
As of the writing of the staff report, 48 people have signed a letter to the Zoning Commission
titled “Concerns Regarding Rezoning Maple Terrace Lots 25 & 26.” One additional letter was
provided from two property owners who also signed the aforementioned letter. Topics included
in public comment include:
Conflict with Maple Terrace covenants which restrict use to single-family residential.
As stated in Section 38.100.100. of the Unified Development Code, where the provisions of any
private restriction are more restrictive or impose higher standards than the provisions of this
chapter, the city has no duty to enforce such private restrictions or advise of their existence.
Appendix C of the staff report provides a list of residential uses allowed in the R-O zoning
district. Single-family residences are an allowed use.
Inconsistent with the City’s Growth Policy.
32
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 16 of 18
See Appendix C and review criterion A in Section 4.
Review criteria including Street Congestion, Compatible growth, Character, Conserving
the Value of Buildings.
See Section 4 analysis.
Topography of the property
To be reviewed during Site Plan process.
APPENDIX C - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING
Adopted Growth Policy Designation:
The property is designated as Residential in the Bozeman Community Plan future land use map.
The Bozeman Community Plan describes the character of the land use category as follows:
Residential. This category designates places where the primary activity is urban
density dwellings. Other uses which complement residences are also acceptable such
as parks, low intensity home based occupations, fire stations, churches, and schools.
High density residential areas should be established in close proximity to commercial
centers to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities to persons
without requiring the use of an automobile. Implementation of this category by
residential zoning should provide for and coordinate intensive residential uses in
proximity to commercial centers. The residential designation indicates that it is
expected that development will occur within municipal boundaries, which may
require annexation prior to development. The dwelling unit density expected within
this classification varies between 6 and 32 dwellings per net acre. A higher density
may be considered in some locations and circumstances. A variety of housing types
can be blended to achieve the desired density. Large areas of single type housing are
discouraged. In limited instances the strong presence of constraints and natural
features such as floodplains may cause an area to be designated for development at a
lower density than normally expected within this category. All residential housing
should be arranged with consideration of compatibility with adjacent development,
natural constraints such as watercourses or steep slopes, and in a fashion which
advances the overall goals of the Bozeman growth policy. The residential designation
is intended to provide the primary locations for additional housing within the
planning area. (Page 3-10)
Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses:
The applicant has requested zoning of R-O (Residential Office). The intent of the R-O District as
stated in the UDC is:
33
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 17 of 18
… to provide for and encourage the development of multi-household and apartment
development and compatible professional offices and businesses that would blend
well with adjacent land uses. These purposes are accomplished by:
1. Providing for a mixture of housing types, including single and multi-household
dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents.
Use of this zone is appropriate for areas characterized by office or multi-household
development; and/or areas along arterial corridors or transitional areas between
residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. (38.300.110.G.)
The following table consolidates uses allowed in the R-O zoning district from Tables
38.310.030.A and B of the UDC:
Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts
Accessory dwelling units P
Apartments/apartment building P
Cottage housing P
Single-, Two-, Three- and Four-household dwelling P
Townhouses & rowhouses (five attached units or less; more than five attached units) P
Community residential facilities (with 8 or fewer residents; or 9 or more) P
Cooperative household
Family day care home
Group day care home
Group living (38.360.150)
Lodging houses
Permitted accessory and non-residential uses in residential zoning districts
Essential services Type I A
Guest House A
Home-based business A/S
Other buildings and structures typically accessory to authorized uses A
Private or jointly owned recreational facilities A
Signs A
Temporary buildings and yards incidental to construction work A
Temporary sales and office buildings A
Bed and breakfast P
Community centers P
Day care centers P
Essential services Type II P
34
Staff Report for 18217 Maple Terrace Zone Map Amendment Page 18 of 18
Essential services Type III C
Short Term Rental (Type 1, 2) P
Offices P
Public and private parks P
Medical offices, clinics, and centers P
Uses approved as part of a PUD per division 38.380 C
APPENDIX D - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Property Owners:
Bobby Smith, 1811 Durston Road, Bozeman, MT 59715 Charles and Barbara Parks, 2795 Santa Clara Circle, St. George, UT 84790 Applicant: Cory Taylor, 1232 N. Alexandria Ave, Los Angeles, CA 90029.
Report By: Addi Jadin, Associate Planner
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by
this zone map amendment.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Application Materials
Maple Terrace zone map amendment exhibit
Maple Terrace zone map amendment application, including an adjoining property owners list
and project summary.
Public Comment
35
.33 ACRES .34 ACRES
PROPOSED R-O PROPOSED R-O
DURSTON RD.
R/W
R/W
R-1 R-1
R-1R-O
R-O
R-2 R-2
LOT 22 LOT 7
LOT 6
LOT 1A
C/L
14871 SF
LOT 26
14340 SF
LOT 25
10' UTILITY EASEMENT
10' - 0"
87° 52' 32"
100.00'
N E
87° 52' 32"
100.00'
N E
89° 02' 00"
100.14'
N W 89° 02' 00"
100.14'
N W2° 03' 13"176.00'NW2° 03' 13"170.70'NW2° 03' 13"181.30'SEScale
Project number
Date
Drawn by
Checked by 1" = 30'-0"5/6/18 8:45:40 PMFIG. 1
MAPLE TERRACE SUBDIVISION
0001
ZONE MAP
AMENDMENT MARCH 2018
CT
CT
No. Description Date
36
A1
Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16
Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
1. PROJECT
Development
Name:
Description:
2. PROPERTY OWNER
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
3. APPLICANT
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
4. REPRESENTATIVE
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
5. PROPERTY
Full Street
Address:
Full Legal
Description:
Current
Zoning:
Current Use:
Community
Plan
Designation:
37
Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16
Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications
Overlay
District: Neighborhood Conservation Entryway Corridor None
Urban
Renewal
District:
Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast None
6. STATISTICS (ONLY APPLICATION TYPES 2-12, 17, 24 AND 26)
Gross Area: Acres: Square Feet:
Net Area: Acres: Square Feet:
Dwelling
Units:
Nonresidential
Gross Building
Square Feet:
7. APPLICATION TYPES
Check all that apply, use noted forms. Form Form
1. Pre-application Consultation None 17. Informal Review INF
2. Master Site Plan MSP 18. Zoning Deviation None
3. Site Plan SP 19. Zoning or Subdivision
Variance
Z/SVAR
4. Subdivision pre-application PA 20. Conditional Use Permit CUP
5. Subdivision preliminary plat PP 21. Special Temporary Use
Permit
STUP
6. Subdivision final plat FP 22. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP
7. Subdivision exemption SE 23. Regulated Activities in
Wetlands
RW
8. Condominium Review CR 24. Zone Map Amendment (non
Annexation)
ZMA
9. PUD concept plan PUDC 25. UDC Text Amendment ZTA
10. PUD preliminary plan PUDP 26. Growth Policy Amendment GPA
11. PUD final plan PUDFP 27. Modification/Plan
Amendment
MOD
12. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX 28. Extension of Approved Plan EXT
13. Administrative Interpretation
Appeal
AIA 29. Reasonable Accommodation RA
14. Administrative Project Decision
Appeal
APA 30. Other:
15. Commercial Nonresidential COA CCOA
1 6. Historic Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay COA
NCOA
8. APPLICATION FEES AND MATERIALS
A. Fees are to be provided based upon the adopted fee schedule FS. Contact our office for an
estimate.
38
A1
Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16
Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
1. PROJECT
Development
Name:
Description:
2. PROPERTY OWNER
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
3. APPLICANT
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
4. REPRESENTATIVE
Name:
Full Address:
Phone:
Email:
5. PROPERTY
Full Street
Address:
Full Legal
Description:
Current
Zoning:
Current Use:
Community
Plan
Designation:
39
Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16
Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications
Overlay
District: Neighborhood Conservation Entryway Corridor None
Urban
Renewal
District:
Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast None
6. STATISTICS (ONLY APPLICATION TYPES 2-12, 17, 24 AND 26)
Gross Area: Acres: Square Feet:
Net Area: Acres: Square Feet:
Dwelling
Units:
Nonresidential
Gross Building
Square Feet:
7. APPLICATION TYPES
Check all that apply, use noted forms. Form Form
1. Pre-application Consultation None 17. Informal Review INF
2. Master Site Plan MSP 18. Zoning Deviation None
3. Site Plan SP 19. Zoning or Subdivision
Variance
Z/SVAR
4. Subdivision pre-application PA 20. Conditional Use Permit CUP
5. Subdivision preliminary plat PP 21. Special Temporary Use
Permit
STUP
6. Subdivision final plat FP 22. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP
7. Subdivision exemption SE 23. Regulated Activities in
Wetlands
RW
8. Condominium Review CR 24. Zone Map Amendment (non
Annexation)
ZMA
9. PUD concept plan PUDC 25. UDC Text Amendment ZTA
10. PUD preliminary plan PUDP 26. Growth Policy Amendment GPA
11. PUD final plan PUDFP 27. Modification/Plan
Amendment
MOD
12. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX 28. Extension of Approved Plan EXT
13. Administrative Interpretation
Appeal
AIA 29. Reasonable Accommodation RA
14. Administrative Project Decision
Appeal
APA 30. Other:
15. Commercial Nonresidential COA CCOA
1 6. Historic Neighborhood
Conservation Overlay COA
NCOA
8. APPLICATION FEES AND MATERIALS
A. Fees are to be provided based upon the adopted fee schedule FS. Contact our office for an
estimate.
40
41
Development Review Application A1 Page 3 of 3 Revision Date 01-04-16
Required Forms: Varies by project type Recommended Forms: Presentation of submitted plans and specifications
B. Application materials shall be submitted for each application as shown in the specific guidance
and checklists that is provided for each application type. A common development review application
form and common notice materials may be provided for an application that includes more than one
application type. All other application materials shall be submitted for each individual application
type per the project guidance and checklists.
9. CERTIFICATIONS AND SIGNATURES
This application must be signed by both the applicant(s) and the property owner(s) (if different) for
all application types before the submittal will be accepted. The only exception to this is an informal
review application that may be signed by the applicant(s) only.
As indicated by the signature(s) below, the applicant(s) and property owner(s) submit this
application for review under the terms and provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code. It is further
indicated that any work undertaken to complete a development approved by the City of Bozeman
shall be in conformance with the requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and any special
conditions established by the approval authority. I acknowledge that the City has an Impact Fee
Program and impact fees may be assessed for my project. Further, I agree to grant City personnel
and other review agency representative’s access to the subject site during the course of the review
process (Section 38.34.050, BMC). I (We) hereby certify that the above information i s true and
correct to the best of my (our) knowledge.
Certification of Completion and Compliance – I understand that conditions of approval may be
applied to the application and that I will comply with any conditions of approval or make necessary
corrections to the application materials in order to comply with municipal code provisions.
Statement of Intent to Construct According to the Final Plan – I acknowledge that construction
not in compliance with the approved final plan may result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct
noncompliance.
Applicant
Signature:
Printed Name:
Owner
Signature:
Printed Name:
Owner
Signature
Printed Name:
If signing as a corporation, please provide the title and position of the individual signing on behalf of the
corporation. Attach separate sheets for additional owner signatures.
CONTACT US
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building
20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only)
PO Box 1230
Bozeman, MT 59771
phone 406-582-2260
fax 406-582-2263
planning@bozeman.net
www.bozeman.net
42
PLS
Plans and Specifications PLS Page 1 of 4 Revision Date 5-1-17 Required Forms: Applies to all applications Other Forms: None.
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS INTRODUCTION In order for city staff to efficiently review your project in a timely manner, the application materials and the plan sets submitted must be clear, complete and thorough. This handout provides additional details for the application requirements outlined in the project checklists. If the requirements of this handout are met with your application it will minimize the delays that can occur when an application is unclear, incomplete or not formatted correctly. These requirements are mandatory. If the application materials do not meet these standards they will require correction, which will delay your project. GENERAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 1. All plans and drawings must be accurately drawn, using a conventional scale such as 1:20 or 1:1/4, and with only one scale per sheet. Details may contain a separate scale if clearly labeled. 2. All text and annotations should be at a font size to enable it to be easily read – 10 point or more. Many plan sets require that 11” x 17” plan sizes be submitted. The text and annotations on plans that size must be readable when printed at that size. If plans are unreadable at the 11” x 17” size, they will not be accepted for review. 3. Plan sizes must meet minimum and maximum size requirements. No plans outside of the stated sizes will be accepted. 4. Plans/drawings must not contain disclaimers such as “Not to Scale” and “Do Not Scale.” (perspectives excepted) and drawings must be drawn true to the stated scale(s). 5. Plans must not contain disclaimers such as “Preliminary” and “Not for Construction.” 6. Provide all relevant measured dimensions annotated on the plans/drawings. For example label typical dimensions of parking spaces, drive accesses, drive aisles and sidewalks. 7. Consistent detailing. All existing and proposed site plan elements (e.g., sidewalks, parking spaces, fire lanes, building foot prints, etc.) must be labeled (unless a legend is provided) and dimensioned (unless a detail is provided). 8. The clearest way to present proposals is to group “existing” and “proposed” drawings side by side, using the same scale for both. 9. Each sheet and/or drawing must have a title box with the drawing name, sheet number and date clearly visible in bold. If sheets are updated or revised a new date must be applied to the sheet. For example, the civil utility plans might be labeled: C2.0 Utilities 05-01-2017. This is important as this will also be the digital file name. See naming protocol below. 10. The use of a title sheet for all general information, project team, data, calculations (parking, parkland, open spaces, and table of contents is required. The title must appear in bold letters across the top of the cover sheet. If the site plan includes a conditional use include the words “and Conditional Use.” 11. If the project is part of an existing development the name of the existing development must appear in the title. For example, “Arbys at Bozeman Gateway” or “Building K at the Cannery District.” 12. The vicinity map with zoning must be on the cover page. 13. A table of contents or plan schedule for all sheets in the plan set must be included on the title sheet with a date for each sheet. If revisions are required, the title sheet must be updated to reflect all revised sheets with a new date. 14. Fully annotated plans and drawings are more understandable, e.g. if a line is shown on the plan between two properties or other conditions such as easements, it must be annotated by adding descriptors to clarify the site condition.
43
Plans and Specifications PLS Page 2 of 4 Revision Date 5-1-17 Required Forms: Applies to all applications Other Forms: None.
15. A legend for all line types and symbols must be included on plan sets. 16. The plan sheets must not be overly congested with line types. When in doubt produce an extra sheet that separates the information. For example, produce a separate utility and easement sheet for utilities to clarify that information if the overall site plan contains too many lines and line types. 17. In general, the plan sheets are where most project information must be included. Separate cut sheets, exhibits, and summary tables on 8 1/2” by 11” will not be accepted. The only exception is for project narratives, property owners’ association documents, SID documents, easements, agreements, maintenance plans, water rights information, payback district information, contracts, deeds, weed plans, and standalone technical reports such as traffic studies, wetland reports, sewer and water reports, environmental, etc. PARKLAND TRACKING REQUIREMENTS 1. Parkland tracking on plans is required in 38.27.020BMC. This only applies to projects with residential development or residential units. 2. Documentation of compliance with the parkland dedication requirements of Section 38.27.020, UDC must be provided with the final plat, preliminary plat layout (park site plan) or individual development site plan (if previously subdivided). A parkland dedication tracking table showing the parkland requirements for the overall subdivision and the method of meeting the parkland dedication shall be included on the site plan. The table shall explicitly state how much parkland acreage, cash-in-lieu, or value of improvements-in-lieu was approved and allocated, as well as what is being proposed, for each lot of the subdivision or site development. 3. If residential development, each phase, lot or individual site plan of the development must have a copy of the parkland dedication tracking table provided below included on the site plan. Contact the Parks Department if you have questions on how to fill out the table. 4. If improvements in lieu are proposed for an existing park within the subdivision, a detailed park improvement site plan, including layout and product manufacturer cut sheets with a cost estimate for all improvements must be provided for Parks Department review. The Parks Department will provide a comparison chart indicating the value of code-required basic improvements versus proposed improvements. 5. Unless previously provided, provide the appropriate waiver of protest for future park maintenance district statement on the plat or site plan. Contact the Parks Department if you are uncertain if a waiver has been granted. 6. The parkland dedication tracking table that must be included on plans is as follows. If you have questions on how to fill out this table contact the Parks Department.
PUBLIC PARK LAND DEDICATION TRACKING TABLE CURRENT PREVIOUS PHASES
SUBDIVISION NAME: _______________________ PROJECT NAME: ___________________________
TOTAL FOR SUBDIVISION THIS PROPOSAL PHASE / LOT ___________ PARK DED AC CIL &/OR IIL
PHASE / LOT __________ PARK DED AC, CIL &/OR IIL
PHASE/LOT* __________ PARK DED AC CIL &/OR IIL
NUMBER OF RES. UNITS PER PHASE / LOT / SITE PLAN:
ACREAGE PARK LAND AND / OR CIL REQUIRED: **
VALUE OF IMPROVEMENTS IN LIEU PROPOSED: $___________________ VS. VALUE OF CODE-REQD. BASIC PARK IMPROVEMENTS:
$___________________ (ATTACH COMPARISON CHART SPREADSHEET)
ACREAGE PARK LAND PREVIOUSLY DEEDED TO COB:
44
Plans and Specifications PLS Page 3 of 4 Revision Date 5-1-17 Required Forms: Applies to all applications Other Forms: None.
COLOR AND MATERIAL PALETTE 1. Color and material palettes are required for all new buildings and structures. A color and material palette must include all the proposed exterior building materials for all structures and site details. 2. The exterior building materials must include all siding, trim, roofing, windows, stairways, doors, balconies, railings windows, storefront, glass/glazing, walls, mechanical screening, trash enclosures, accessory equipment enclosures (generator, etc.), awnings and other architectural elements. 3. For smaller less complex projects that are using readily known building materials, a color and material palette may be presented in color on an 11” x 17” sheet that includes a color picture of the material and the specification. Each material must be keyed to the building elevations. 4. For larger, more complex projects the palette must be presented on a physical board with samples of the proposed building materials in their proposed color. Each sample must have a specification and be keyed to the building elevations. 5. Color perspectives that depict the building accurately and with the proposed building materials are encouraged to be submitted with each application. The color perspective does not satisfy the color and materials palette requirement. APPLICATION SETS 1. Application sets are independent sets of information that include one copy of all information submitted with the application. 2. Application sets that include legal documents, letters, technical reports, narratives, studies and other documentation in addition to plan sheets must include a copy of each item in each application set. All documentation of this type must have a visible and clear date of preparation on the front sheet of the document or study. 3. Three total sets of all information are required with most applications. Two of the sets must include full size plans, one set may include 11” x 17” plans. Full size plan set sizes must not exceed 24” x 36.” 4. Application sets must be bound and two hole punched at the top of the page. Three ring binders with three hole punch are not accepted. 5. If 11” x 17” plans are included, do not trifold them. Fold them in half, then fold the right half back on itself at a 45 degree angle in order to accommodate a two hole punch at the top. Plans must be accessible to be unfolded when bound in a two hole file. 6. Application sets should be organized and collated in the following general order 1) cover sheet/routing sheet 2) applications and checklists; 3) narratives/responses/photographs; 4) legal docs: CC&R’s, easements, deeds, agreements, CIL water rights, etc.; 5) plans; 6) appendices: standalone technical reports 7. Project narratives and responses must not be overwritten or provided on the application checklists. If responding to a checklist item provide a response on a separate document. 8. Plans must be grouped by discipline: Civil, Architectural, Landscape and Electrical/Lighting. 9. All plans must be stapled together and folded to a final size of 8 ½” x 11” or 8 ½” x 14”.If the plan set is large the plans must be stapled into sets by discipline and folded independently. State law requires us to keep a full size paper copy of all plans in our files. The plan sets must be folded so that they can be filed in the project archives.
ACREAGE PARK LAND YET TO BE CONVEYED:
PARK MASTER PLAN APPROVAL DATE: ______________
* INDICATE ADDITIONAL PHASES AS APPLICABLE
**SHOW ACTUAL CALCULATIONS
45
Plans and Specifications PLS Page 4 of 4 Revision Date 5-1-17 Required Forms: Applies to all applications Other Forms: None.
DIGITAL COPIES AND NAMING PROTOCOL The city requires digital copies of all planning applications in order to produce cost savings, eliminate paper waste and enhance the flow of information between the city, external agencies, neighborhoods and the applicant. The digital copy must include a copy of all documents and plan sheets submitted as part of the application. The following requirements apply to digital copies. 1. Two digital copies are required with most applications. The copies may be on CD or on a USB drive. 2. The digital copies must be separated into three categories: Documents, Plans and Appendices. 3. Naming protocol. Each individual document or plan sheet must have a proper name and date. The name should be easily understandable. Groups of plan sheets or document sets with multiple types of documents will not be accepted. Plan sheets must include the sheet number. For example a document might be labeled “A1 Development Review application 05-01-2017” or “City Parkland Deed 05-01-17.” Plan sheets are required to be listed individually. For example a plan sheet might be labeled “A300 Floor Plan level 1 and 2 05-01-2017” or “PM Photometric Plan 05-01-17.” Do not include other tab, section or other references in the digital file names. 4. No individual files will be accepted that are larger than 5 mb. Files that are larger must be broken down into smaller files. 5. Label all CD’s with the project name and date. Attach a small tag to all USB drive with the project name and date. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771
phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net
46
Applicants:
Charles & Barbara Parks
Heather & Cory Taylor
Bobby Smith
N1 – Noticing Materials Posting
List of names and addresses of property owners within 200 feet of Lots
25 and 26 of Maple Terrace Subdivision
Maple Terrace Subdivision Block A
T2SR5E
Lot 1-A
Robert & Judith Locker
1705 Durston RD
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 1-B
Mark Peterson & Irene Dahl
621 North 17th Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 2
Hannah Counter
6963 Cutty Sark ST
Anchorage, AK 99502
Lot 5
Robert Mackenzie
2400 Durston RD
Apt 74
Bozeman, MT 58718
Lot 6
Robert & Judith Locker
1705 Durston RD
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 7
Mary Dell Joyner
705 Blackmore PL
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 8
Ruel & Sherry Brown
707 Blackmore PL
Bozeman, MT 59715
1
47
Lot 9
Robert & Elizabeth Monnin
711 Blackmore PL
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 21
David & Janine Steel
Lot 22
702 N 19th LLC
8959 Sandy Creek LN
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 24
Bobby Smith
1811 Durston RD
Bozeman, MT 59715
T2SR5E
Grafs First Rearrangement of Block 6, Kirk Second Subdivision Block A
Lot 1
Timothy & Christine Neu
PSC 2 Box 15715
Lot 2
Brian Newhall
1205 Leslie Ave
Helena, MT 59601
Lot 32
Jeffrey & Elizabeth Deshazo
515 North 18th Ave
Bozeman, MT 59718
Lot 33
Spencer & Traci Welch
519 North 18th Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 34
Morris Zahn
PO Box 3743
Bozeman, MT 59772
Grafs First Rearrangement of Block 6, Kirk Second Subdivision Block B
Lot 1
2
48
Andrew & Thomas Hurlburt
2621 West College ST
STE A
Bozeman, MT 59718
Lot 2
Mathew David Johnson
PO 4184
Bozeman, MT 59772
Lot 3
Michal Gilpin
514 North 18th Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 32
William & Tammy Drysdale
517 North 17th Ave
Bozeman, MT 59715
Lot 33
Larry & Janet Houser – Family Trust
8 Indian Paintbrush DR
Bozeman, MT 59718
3
49
MAPLE TERRACE ZONE MAP AMENDMENT
Owner/Applicant:
LOT 26
Chuck and Barbara Parks / Heather and Cory Taylor
2795 Santa Clara Circle, St. George UT 84790
LOT 25
Bobby Smith
1811 Durston Road, Bozeman MT 59715
PROJECT LOCATION & MAP:
The .67-acre subject properties are located at 1809 West Durston Road, which is generally
located on Durston Road at the northeast corner of Durston Road & North 19th Avenue. The
property is legally described as lots 25 and 26, Maple Terrace Subdivision, and the adjacent
Montana Department of Transportation right-of-way & right-of-way acquisition; and located in
the SW ¼ of Section 1, T1S, R5E, PMM, Gallatin County, Montana.
A. Consistency with the City’s growth policy
As previously noted, this property is now designated as “Residential” according to the Bozeman
2020 Community Plan Future Land Use Map. The proposed “R-O” zoning designation is in
compliance with this land use designation. Subsequent site plan design and further
development will be evaluated for compliance with the growth policy during the next stage of the
development review process.
B. Securing safety from fire, panic, and other dangers
The regulatory provisions established for all the zoning designations, in conjunction with
provisions for adequate transportation facilities, will address safety concerns with any further
development of the property. For example, a private drive access may not be longer than 150
feet without a secondary access or an approved turnaround such as a hammerhead or cul-de
sac.
C. Promotion of health and the general welfare
The subject property is currently within the City of Bozeman. Municipal infrastructure extensions
(i.e., water and sanitary sewer) and public services (i.e., police and fire protection) are available
to the property. Connection to City water and sewer will be required upon development.
Generally, the standards of development and accompanying development review processes
(subdivision or site plan) will adequately address the issues of health and general welfare for
any zoning designation.
50
D. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks,
and other public requirements
Again, the subject property is currently within the City of Bozeman. An assessment of the
impacts to infrastructure, public services, parkland, and other community requirements will be
evaluated during further development of the property.
E. Provision of adequate light and air
The regulatory standards set forth in the UDO for all of the residential zoning districts will
provide the necessary provisions (i.e., yard setbacks, lot coverage, parkland/open space and
building heights), which are intended to provide for adequate light and air for the surrounding
neighborhood and for any additional development on the subject property.
F. Lessening of congestion in the streets
This site would be serviced by Durston Road, an arterial street. Increased traffic may occur with
additional site development. Access to the property to restricted with further development (i.e.
right-in/right-out only); these issues will be considered and any appropriate mitigation measures
required, during site plan review.
G. Promote Compatible Urban Growth
The UDO limits the number of people living in a household to a maximum of four unrelated
people (see definition of “household” in Section 18.80.1390). Minimum yard setbacks, height
requirements, maximum lot coverage. Compliance with the regulatory standards set forth in the
UDO and the International Building Code will aid in providing adequately sized dwelling units.
According to the census information for the City of Bozeman the average household size has
been declining from 5.74 in 1930 to 2.48 in 2000. This historical trend is likely to continue and
would indicate that the undue concentration of the population is not a significant issue with any
zoning designation. R-O zoning will allow for mixed-use and higher density of housing units,
therefore promoting the City of Bozeman’s goals and objectives to reduce “urban sprawl”, lower
the cost of housing, and maintain rural lands. (Bozeman Community Plan June 1, 2009)
H. Reasonable consideration to the character of the district
The character of this part of town is varied. The subject properties are at the intersection of two
busy arterial streets. Durston Road to the east is primarily residences; while Durston Road to
the west is a mix of larger residential developments and smaller commercial and office types of
uses. To the north and south of the subject properties lie residential districts with densities and
zoning ranging from R-1 to R-3. North 19th Avenue is primarily retail, commercial, and office
types of uses. The proposed lots to R-O is a natural extension, maintaining the urban
consistency of the R-O zoning along North 19th and at the corner of Durston Road being a
minor arterial designation similar to the corners of North 19th and West Koch St. and West
Babcock St.
51
I. Reasonable consideration to the peculiar suitability of the property for particular uses.
Due to the properties location at the intersection of two arterial streets, access to the property
may be restricted with further development. Again, this will be considered and any appropriate
mitigation measures required, during site plan review. No other significant physical constraints
are found on the subject property. This property is found to generally be suitable for R-O types
of uses.
J. Conserving the value of buildings
The property currently is vacant. The R-O zoning designation will not negatively affect the value
of any adjacent buildings and/or land uses.
K. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
The R-O zoning designation would allow appropriate residential and/or office types of uses of
the land without negatively impacting existing land uses and development. As indicated by the
applicant, the existing structure will most likely be remodeled to suit the uses permitted with the
R-O zoning district. Given the properties location, at the intersection of two arterial streets, and
access issues related too, staff finds the proposed uses may be appropriate. Furthermore, staff
finds the proposed R-O zoning designation would be an appropriate extension of the existing R
O zoning district along North 19th Avenue to the north of the subject properties.
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
1
Addi Jadin
From:Judy Locker <judylocker@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 14, 2018 7:57 AM
To:Addi Jadin; Agenda; Chris Saunders
Subject:Rezoning Letter August 13, 20018 .docx
Attachments:Rezoning Letter August 13, 20018 .docx
Hello,
I’m sending this to you regarding the rezoning of Lots 25 and 26 in the Maple Terrace Subdivision. Please read it. I will
bring a copy and our signed signatures that oppose this ruling to the Bozeman City Clerk this afternoon.
Thank you,
Judy Locker, Owner of Lot 1-A
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114