Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-07-19 City Commission Packet Materials - A2. Mountain Vista Zone Map AmendmentPage 1 of 26 18-438 Staff Report for the Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Public Hearing Date: Zoning Commission public hearing is on December 18, 2018 City Commission public hearing is on January 7, 2019 Project Description: Mountain Vista zone map amendment application requesting amendment of the City Zoning Map for an existing lot consisting of approximately 2.63 acres / 114,624 square feet from R-2 Residential Moderate Density to R-4 Residential High Density. Project Location: The property is generally located at the intersection of West Babcock Street and Michael Grove Avenue, addressed as 2928 West Babcock Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The property is legally described as Tract 24 located in the W ½ of the W ½ of the NE ¼ of the SW ¼ of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, 59715. Staff Recommendation: Approval Zoning Commission Recommendation: Approval, 2-1 vote Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff report, application materials, public comment, advisory board recommendations and all information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 18-438 and move to approve the Mountain Vista zone map amendment, with contingencies required to complete the application processing. (2/3 vote required) Report Date: December 19, 2018 Staff Contact: Melissa Pope; Assistant Planner Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative Executive Summary Unresolved Issues None identified at this time. Project Summary The applicant, Glen Haven Properties, Inc., requests rezoning of an existing lot totaling 2.63 acres from R-2 Residential Moderate Density to R-4 Residential High Density. The subject property is currently developed with single-household dwelling and shop, with a large yard to the south. The property is surrounded by single- to four-household dwellings that are 186 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 2 of 26 zoned R-3. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan designates the property as residential. Alternatives 1. Approve the application with contingencies as presented; 2. Deny the application based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or 3. Open and continue the public hearing, with specific direction to staff or the applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 1 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 2 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................ 2 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .............................................................................................. 3 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONTINGENCIES OF ZONE MAP AMENDMENT6 SECTION 3 – ADVISORY COMMENTS ........................................................................ 6 SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS .................................. 8 SECTION 5 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ....... 8 Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ......................................................................... 8 PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ................................................... 15 APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND ........ 15 APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .............................................. 16 APPENDIX C – SUBDIVISION PLATS FOR SURROUNDING REAL PROPERTY. 18 APPENDIX D - PROJECT GROWTH POLICY AND PROPOSED ZONING ............. 20 APPENDIX E - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ...................... 26 FISCAL EFFECTS ........................................................................................................... 26 ATTACHMENTS ............................................................................................................. 26 187 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 3 of 26 SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES Current Land Use 188 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 4 of 26 Future Land Use Growth Policy Designation 189 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 5 of 26 Current Zoning 190 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 6 of 26 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. The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not specifically listed as conditions of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or state law. 2. The applicant must submit a zone amendment map, titled “Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment”, on a 24” by 36” mylar, an 8 ½” by 11” or 8 ½” by 14” paper exhibit, and a digital copy of the area to be zoned, acceptable to the Director of Public Works, which will be utilized in the preparation of the Ordinance to officially amend the City of Bozeman Zoning Map. Said map shall contain a metes and bounds legal description of the perimeter of the subject property including adjacent rights-of-way, and total acreage of the property. 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 – ADVISORY COMMENTS 1. Prior to future development approval, if they do not already exist, the applicant will need to provide and file with the County Clerk and Recorder's office executed Waivers of Right to Protest Creation of Special Improvement Districts (SID’s) for the following: a. Street improvements to West Babcock Street from South Cottonwood Road to Main Street including paving, curb/gutter, sidewalk, and storm drainage b. Intersection improvements to Fowler Avenue and Babcock Street c. Intersection improvements to West Babcock Street and Main Street 2. The applicant may obtain a copy of the template SID waiver from the City Engineering Department (Anna Russell). The document filed must specify that in the event an SID is not utilized for the completion of these improvements, the applicant agrees to participate in an alternate financing method for the completion of said 191 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 7 of 26 improvements on a fair share, proportionate basis as determined by square footage of property, taxable valuation of the property, traffic contribution from the development, or a combination thereof. The applicant must provide a copy of the SID waiver filed with the County Clerk and Recorder prior to the zone map amendment. 3. Upon future development, right-of-way along West Babcock Road will be required to be dedicated, if it does not already exist, to ensure that a 90 foot right-of-way exists to match West Babcock’s collector street classification. 4. Upon future development, a ten foot utility easement must be provided along West Babcock Road south of the additional required right-of-way. The executed easement must be delivered to the City Engineering Department (Anna Russell). The easement must be executed on the City’s standard easement form. A copy of the standard easement form may be obtained from the City Engineering Department. 5. As the proposed zone change will result in an increase in density of the property, capacity of the existing city infrastructure will need to be verified prior to approval any future development. The applicant is encouraged to proceed through the Community Development Department’s conception review or informal review application to evaluate project specific questions. 6. The applicant is advised to contact Brian Heaston with the City Engineering Department to obtain an analysis of cash-in-lieu of water rights for any proposed development. BMC Section 38.410.130.A.1 requires provision for water rights or cash in lieu (CIL) thereof to be paid prior to any development approval. No action is required for the proposed zone map amendment to address this item. 7. Prior to future development, an estimate of the peak-hour sanitary sewer demand will need to be provided, so the City Engineering Department can verify downstream sewer capacity to accommodate future facilities. The applicant should be aware that depending on the point of connection downstream upgrades may be required. 8. The project falls within several Payback Districts. The applicant must contact the City’s Engineering Department (Katherine Maines) to determine if the property has outstanding payments due. Any payments required must be made before approval of any development or redevelopment. 9. The proposed development must meet the City’s access separation requirements described in section 38.400.090.D. The applicant will need to align a future proposed drive access with Michael Grove Avenue. 10. The applicant is advised that a mutual access easement will need to be provided for the future drive and other paved access to the property to the west (yet to be annexed) to prevent conflicts with the City’s access spacing requirements, per 38.400.090.F. 192 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 8 of 26 SECTION 4 - 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 October 17, 2018. The DRC did not identify any infrastructure or regulatory constraints that would impede the approval of the application. The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this zone map amendment on December 18, 2018 and voted 2-1 in favor to forward a recommendation to the City Commission on the zone map amendment. The hearing was held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, and began at 6 p.m. The meeting minutes and video are available on the City of Bozeman website under the City TV and Streaming Audio tab of the Services page, https://www.bozeman.net/services/city-tv- and-streaming-audio. Eight members of the public provided public comment for the record in opposition of the application. A direct link to the December 18, 2018 video is available here: https://media.avcaptureall.com/session.html?sessionid=32320fea-d0a8-4c14-9abe- ac45676623d1&prefilter=654,3835. The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on January 7, 2019. The hearing will be held at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman. The meeting will begin at 6 p.m. SECTION 5 - ZONE MAP AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS In considering applications for 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. 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 A. Be in accordance with a growth policy. Yes. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan (growth policy) designates the subject property as residential (see Table C-16 in Appendix C). As Table C-16 from the growth policy shows, the R-4 zoning district is a proper implementing district for the residential designation. 193 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 9 of 26 Under the growth policy’s description of the residential future land use category it states “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 subject property is located roughly 1/2 of a mile (along City streets) from the intersection of Babcock Street/23rd Avenue and Main Street where a variety of commercial uses exist. Furthermore, a Streamline bus stop is located within roughly 1/10 of a mile of the subject property, with bus service providing direct weekday and weekend service to downtown and the MSU campus. As a result, the proposed R-4 zoning amendment is in-line with the intent of the growth policy’s residential land use designation as it would allow for higher density residential development on a property located in a walkable, transit rich, neighborhood, in close proximity to commercial centers. Additionally, the proposed zone map amendment advances multiple objectives of the growth policy: 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.” 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.” Housing Objective 1.3: “Promote the provision of a wide variety of housing types in a range of costs to meet the diverse residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Housing Objective 3.3: “Promote the development of a wide variety of housing types, designs, and costs to meet the wide range of residential needs of Bozeman residents.” Environmental Quality and Critical Lands Objective 4.2: “Promulgate efficient land use practices.” No conflicts with the Growth Policy have been identified. B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers. Yes. The subject property is currently served by City emergency services, including police and fire. Future development of the property will be required to conform to all City of Bozeman public safety, building and land use requirements, which will ensure this criterion is met. The amendment from R-2 to R-4 is not likely to adversely impact safety from fire and other dangers. 194 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 10 of 26 C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare. Yes. Future development of the site will require site plan review and compliance with the City’s Unified Development Code which ensures the promotion of public health, safety and general welfare. The proposed zone map 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. Yes. The subject property is currently served by City water and sewer services in the right- of-way of West Babcock Street. As noted in the advisory comments, an estimate of the peak- hour sanitary sewer demand will need to be provided so the City Engineering Department can verify downstream sewer capacity to accommodate future facilities. Depending on the point of connection, downstream upgrades may be required. Any sewer system upgrades or restrictions resulting from proposed future development will be addressed as a part of the development review process. The property is accessed from West Babcock Street (collector) which provide access to West Main Street/Hwy. 191 to the east (principal arterial). West Babcock Street, adjacent to the property, has sidewalks and bike lanes. In the event of future increased residential densities on the subject property there will be increased demand placed on City services. However, infrastructure needs will be addressed through development review procedures, which ensure this criterion is met. E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air. Yes. Depending on the pitch of the roof, the R-4 district allows for building heights that are eight to ten feet higher than what is allowed in the R-2 district, with the maximum allowed building height being 44 feet in the R-4 district. Minimum setbacks are the same between the R-2 and R-4 districts. The maximum lot coverage in the R-2 district is 40% compared to 50% in the R-4 district. In terms of density, the minimum density in the R-2 district is five dwelling units per net acre compared to eight in the R-4 district. For reference, the R-3 Residential Medium Density District wholly surrounds the subject property (with the exception of the property immediately adjacent to the northwest which is in Gallatin County jurisdiction, but zoned general residential). Depending on the pitch of the roof, the R-4 district allows for building heights that are zero to two feet higher than what is currently allowed in the R-3 district. Minimum setbacks are the same between the R-3 and R-4 districts. While the R-4 district allows slightly higher lot coverages, building heights, and densities than the R-2 district, the degree of difference is not so large that the provision of light and air will be significantly impacted. Additionally, any future redevelopment of the property will be 195 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 11 of 26 subject to development review procedures, as well as building setback and height requirements in the R-4 district, which will ensure the provision of adequate light and air. F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. Yes. The subject property lies along West Babcock Street (collector). The property is currently developed with a single-household dwelling. Higher residential densities along West Babcock Street, as allowed in the R-4 district, will likely result in an increase in vehicle trips to and from the site, which could increase intersection delay along West Babcock Street. A traffic light was recently installed at the intersection of West Babcock Street and Ferguson Avenue (0.8 miles west of the subject property), which will help increase capacity on West Babcock Street. However, in the end, the increase in vehicle trips resulting from increased residential density on the property will not likely be so large as to substantially impact the overall motorized transportation system. In terms of non-motorized transportation, high density residential development, will likely result in increased bike and pedestrian trips to and from the property. However, sufficient non-motorized infrastructure exists in the area to accommodate increased bike and pedestrian trips. West Babcock Street, adjacent to the subject property, has both bike lanes and sidewalks and the West Side trail parallels the property to the east. A Streamline bus stop is located within roughly 1/10 of a mile of the subject property, with bus service providing direct weekday and weekend service to downtown and the MSU campus. Upon receiving a formal development application, the City of Bozeman Public Works Department will review traffic impacts on the subject property and so transportation systems and capacity will be addressed through development review procedures. As a result of the above factors, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to have a negative effect on the motorized or non-motorized transportation systems. G. Promotion of compatible urban growth. Yes. The Growth Policy supports infill development on underutilized properties and providing a variety of housing options to meet the needs of residents. Additionally, Bozeman’s Unified Development Code defines compatible development as “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.” 196 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 12 of 26 Compatible land use is defined as “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 growth policy supports providing a variety of housing options in close proximity to services, employments opportunities, and transportation options. The proposed R-2 to R-4 amendment will enable higher residential densities in a central area of Bozeman, well served by the City’s transportation system and in close proximity to commercial areas. The property is located in an area of single-household dwellings and multi-family dwellings. While the R- 4 designation would allow for increased residential density and greater intensity of development on the site than the surrounding zoning districts, the allowed uses and density would be similar to enhance the diversity of housing types that are currently available and include additional housing types such as apartment buildings. H. Character of the district. Section 38.300.100 of the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) states that the “intent and purpose of the residential zoning districts is to establish areas within the city that are primarily residential in character and to set forth certain minimum standards for development within those areas.” The character of an R-4 district would remain primarily residential with few non-residential uses permitted (see Appendix C). At this time, the final character of future development on the subject parcel is unknown; however, the R-4 district allows for a variety of housing types including single-household dwellings and apartment buildings (five attached dwelling units or more) which may enhance the diversity of housing types that are already found within the neighborhood. The zoning district surrounding the subject property is the R-3 district. The character of this district has many similarities to the R-4 district, which are detailed in Appendix C. The following chart briefly summarizes the primary differences/similarities of the proposed R-4 zoning district and the current zoning district that surrounds the subject property: Chapter 38, Article 3 BMC Authorized Uses and Maximum Building Heights Permitted R-3 R-4 Difference Residential Uses * There are currently 20 different residential uses listed in the BMC. 15/20 Principal 2/20 Special 17/20 Total 18/20 Principal 1/20 Special 19/20 Total 10% Accessory and Non- Residential Uses 5/28 Principal 4/28 Conditional 8/28 Accessory 6/28 Principal 4/28 Conditional 8/28 Accessory 7% 197 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 13 of 26 There are currently 28 accessory and non-residential uses listed in the BMC. 1/28 Special 18/28 Total 2/28 Special 20/28 Total Building Heights (general) 32’ – 42’ 34’ – 44’ 5% * The Babcock Meadows Subdivision Phase 1 and 2B surrounds the subject property on the west, south and east sides, with the exception of one parcel that in un-annexed, and is zoned R-3. The subdivision plats contain a note restricting development on most parcels to single family dwelling units. The property involved with this application was NOT included in the Babcock Meadows subdivision. See Appendix A of this staff report for further detail and Appendix C for a copy of the plats. I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses. Yes. The property is located in an area of residential development of varying densities. In general, the R-4 district allows for greater residential densities and uses compared to the R-2 district. The primary differences in allowed uses is that the R-4 district permits apartments; three or four household dwellings; townhouses with more than two attached units; community residential facilities serving nine or more residents; lodging houses; offices (as special uses); and medical offices, clinics, and centers (conditionally) – see Appendix C for a list of authorized uses in the R-2 and R-4 districts. This site is suitable for increased residential density as there are multiple transportation options and nearby commercial centers. Future development on the site will likely be residential as the only non-residential uses allowed are either conditional uses or must be in conjunction with dwellings. J. Conserving the value of buildings. Yes. While the R-4 designation would allow for high density residential development, the Bozeman Unified Development Code ensures that development will be primarily residential with the potential for limited non-residential uses in the form of offices or medical clinics. As result, the change in development pattern will be largely in the scale and intensity of residential uses. While an R-4 designation will likely result in increased residential density, the Unified Development Code imposes stringent design guidelines, building height restrictions, property line setbacks, open space requirements, among other criteria that act to preserve the value of buildings. As a result, the proposed zone map amendment is not anticipated to negatively impact nearby building values as the development pattern will be similar to what exists today. K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. Yes. The proposed R-4 zone map amendment will encourage the most appropriate use of land as the growth policy designates the property as “Residential,” which the proposed R-4 designation will implement. The City is in need of additional housing to accommodate current and projected demand. To meet this demand a variety of housing options in close proximity to services, employment centers, and transportation options are needed. This zone 198 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 14 of 26 map amendment will help address this need by allowing for higher residential densities in a central area of the City. 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 the following three conditions generally will indicate that a given situation constitutes spot zoning, regardless of variations in factual scenarios. All of the three criteria must be met to be considered spot zoning. 1. Is the proposed use significantly different from the prevailing land uses in the area? No. The subject property is surrounded by residential uses, including single-and multi-household dwellings. The higher residential densities allowed in the R-4 district would be similar to adjacent development patterns noted above. The R-4 zoning district primarily permits residential uses, as do the surrounding zoning districts. As a result the proposed R-4 zoning designation would not result in primary uses of the site which are significantly different from prevailing land uses in the area. Consideration of privately imposed plat restriction on uses is not applicable to this consideration as the evaluation is of the nature of uses allowed by the City’s zoning program. 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-4 zoning designation is being requested by one landowner and would apply to one lot totaling 2.63 acres. The requested R-4 zoning designation is not anticipated to directly benefit surrounding landowners. However, as discussed above, no substantial negative impacts have been identified due to this amendment. 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? No. While the only a single landowner applied for the zone map amendment application, 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. Its adopted growth policy encourages greater intensity of development on infill sites which is consistent with this application. The growth policy was considered for the community as a whole. The proposed R-4 zoning designation will allow for higher densities in a central area 199 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 15 of 26 of this City. In this sense, the proposed R-4 zoning designation will help address Bozeman’s need for greater housing options in close proximity to transportation options, jobs, and services and should 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. APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant, Glen Haven Properties, Inc., requests rezoning of an existing lot totaling 2.63 acres from R-2 Residential Moderate Density to R-4 Residential High Density. The subject property is currently developed with single-household dwelling and shop, with a large yard to the south. The property is surrounded by single-household to four-household dwellings, zoned R-3. The future land use map in the Bozeman Community Plan designates the property as residential. In 2001/2002, the subject property requested to annex into the City of Bozeman with an initial zoning of R-4 Residential High Density District (Planning file application Z-01211). The Bozeman City Commission made a motion to approve initial zoning of R-2 Residential – 200 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 16 of 26 Single Family, Medium-Density; the motion carried following a 4-1 vote. The annexation process was never completed and therefore the annexation did not move forward. The City Commission made findings that R-4 was not compatible with the neighborhood of single- family homes and that vehicle traffic on Babcock Street was too great. In 2005, the subject property annexed into the City of Bozeman with an initial zoning of R-2, that was approved with a 3-0 vote by the Bozeman City Commission (Planning file application Z-05182 Glen Haven Zone Map Amendment). The subject property is wholly surrounding by R-3 zoning districts, with the exception of an un-annexed parcel immediately adjacent to the west of the subject property. Maps of the zoning and county lands are available in Section 1 Map Series of this staff report, on page 5 “current zoning” map. Properties within the Babcock Meadows Subdivision Phase 2B, Plat J-314 (including Donna Avenue, Lillian Way, and Kathryn Court generally west and south of the subject property) are zoned R-3 and have property sizes that would permit 2-4 household dwelling units to be constructed in the current Bozeman Municipal Code; however, there is a plat note that specifies that development will be restricted to single-family dwelling units only, with the exception of three properties (Lots 57, 58, and 62). Babcock Meadows Subdivision Phase 1, Plat J-205 (including Virginia Way, Marilyn Court and portions of Donna Ave generally east of the subject property) are zoned R-3 property sizes that would permit 2-4 household dwelling units to be constructed in the current Bozeman Municipal Code; however, there is a plat note which specifies that development shall be restricted to single-family dwelling units only. It must be noted that although the titling of zoning districts, e.g. R-3, was the same as that used today, the development standards in the zoning districts in place at the time of the Babcock Meadows subdivision were different than those in place today. These subdivisions have already been developed. A copy of Plat J-314 and J-205 is provided in Appendix C of this report. The plats show that the property that is the subject of this application was not subject to the restriction on use established for Babcock Meadows. APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Notice was sent via US 1st Class mail on Monday, November 26, 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 on Wednesday, November 28, 2018. Notice was published in the Legal Ads section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on Sunday, December 2, 2018 and is scheduled to appear again on Sunday, December 30, 2018. At the time of this report, the Planning Division of the City of Bozeman received 11 letters of protest, one letter of public comment, and one letter of public inquiry. Eight members of the public attended the Zoning Commission public hearing on December 18, 2018 and provided 201 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 17 of 26 comment in opposition. Of the eight people who commented, seven had provided written comment to the City and one individual had not. Generally, the public has expressed concern in their public comment regarding parking, traffic congestion on W. Babcock St., safe routes to school and pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, light and noise pollution onto adjacent properties from larger apartment buildings, environmental risk and pollution, conflicts with the growth policy and spot zoning. The City of Bozeman Attorney Office has reviewed all letters of protest received as of the date of this report and confirmed protests meeting statutory requirements exceed the 25% minimum threshold and a two-thirds vote is required from the City Commission to approve this zone map amendment. 202 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 18 of 26 APPENDIX C – SUBDIVISION PLATS FOR SURROUNDING REAL PROPERTY Babcock Meadows Subdivision Phase 1, Plat J-205. Note no. 3 states “Single-family use: Development shall be restricted to single-family dwelling units”. Zoned R-3 203 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 19 of 26 Babcock Meadows Subdivision Phase 2B, Plat J-314. Note no. 3 states “Single-family use: Development shall be restricted to single-family dwelling units. Except for Lots 57, 58 and 62.” Zoned R-3 204 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 20 of 26 APPENDIX D - 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 – see description below. “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.” As Table C-16 from the Bozeman Community Plan shows, the proposed zoning of R-4 is an implementing district for the future land use designation of “Residential.” 205 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 21 of 26 Proposed Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The applicant has requested zoning of R-4 (Residential High Density). The intent of the R-4 residential high density district is “…to provide for high-density residential development through a variety of housing types within the city with associated service functions. This purpose is accomplished by: 1. Providing for minimum lot sizes in developed areas consistent with the established development patterns while providing greater flexibility for clustering lots and mixing housing types in newly developed areas. 2. Providing for a variety of compatible housing types, including single and multihousehold dwellings to serve the varying needs of the community's residents. 3. Allowing office use as a secondary use, measured by percentage of total building area. Use of this zone is appropriate for areas adjacent to mixed-use districts, commercial districts, and/or served by transit to accommodate a higher density of residents in close proximity to jobs and services. 206 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 22 of 26 Table 38.310.030.A Permitted general and group residential uses in residential zoning districts. R-2 is current zoning, R-3 is immediately surrounding the parcel, R-4 is requested zoning. Uses Authorized Uses R-2 R-3 R-4 Accessory dwelling units* - attached (38.360.040) 2 P P P Accessory dwelling units* - detached (38.360.040) P P P Apartments/apartment building* — — P Cottage housing (38.360.110)* P P P Manufactured homes on permanent foundations(38.360.160)* P P P Manufactured home communities* — — — Single-household dwelling (38.360.210) P P P Two-household dwelling (38.360.210) P P P Three household dwelling or four-household dwelling (38.360.210) — P P Townhouses* & rowhouses* (two attached units)(38.360.240) P P P Townhouses* & rowhouses* (five attached units or less) (38.360.240) — P P Townhouses* & rowhouses* (more than five attached units) (38.360.240) — — P Community residential facilities* with eight or fewer residents P P P Community residential facilities* serving nine or more residents — S P Cooperative household* S P P Family day care home* P P P Group day care home* P P P Group living (38.360.150)* P P P 207 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 23 of 26 Uses Authorized Uses R-2 R-3 R-4 Lodging houses* — S P Transitional and emergency housing (38.360.135)* and related services S S S Notes: 1. The primary use of a lot, as measured by building area, permitted in the R-O district is determined by the underlying growth policy land use designation. Where the district lies over a residential growth policy designation the primary use shall be non-office uses; where the district lies over a non-residential designation the primary use shall be office and other non-residential uses. Primary use shall be measured by percentage of building floor area. 2. In the R-S, R-1, and RMH district townhomes are only allowed when utilized to satisfy the requirements of division 38.380, Affordable Housing. May only be utilized in developments subject to division 38.380 of this article. 3. In the R-3 district, townhouse groups must not exceed 120 feet in total width. Table 38.310.030.B Permitted accessory and non-residential uses in residential zoning districts Uses Authorized Uses R-2 R-3 R-4 Essential services Type I* A A A Guest house* A A A Home-based businesses (38.360.140) * A/S A/S A/S Other buildings and structures typically accessory to authorized uses A A A Private or jointly owned recreational facilities A A A Signs*, subject to article 5 of this chapter A A A Temporary buildings and yards incidental to construction work A A A Temporary sales and office buildings A A A Agricultural uses* on 2.5 acres or more (38.360.060) — — — 208 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 24 of 26 Uses Authorized Uses R-2 R-3 R-4 Agricultural uses* on less than 2.5 acres (38.360.060) — — — Bed and breakfast* C C P Commercial stable (38.360.220) — — — Community centers* C C C Day care centers* S P P Essential services Type II* P P P Essential services Type III* 2 C C C Short Term Rental (Type 1)* P P P Short Term Rental (Type 2)* P P P Short Term Rental (Type 3)* — — — Golf courses — — — Offices* — — S 3 Public and private parks P P P Medical offices, clinics, and centers* — — C Recreational vehicle parks (38.360.200)* — — — Restaurant — — — Retail — — — Uses approved as part of a PUD per division 38.380 of this article C C C Veterinary uses — — — Notes: 1. The primary use of a lot, as measured by building area, permitted in the R-O district is determined by the underlying growth policy land use designation. Where the district lies over a residential growth policy designation the primary use shall be non-office uses; where the district lies over a 209 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 25 of 26 non-residential designation the primary use shall be office and other non-residential uses. Primary use shall be measured by percentage of building floor area. 2. Only allowed when service may not be provided from an alternative site or a less intensive installation or set of installations. 3. Only when in conjunction with dwellings. 4. Subject uses are limited to 2,500 square feet of gross floor area and only allowed on street corner sites within a mixed-use building featuring residential units next to and/or above subject uses. Table 38.320.030.C Density, floor area and lot coverage permitted in residential zoning districts. Density, Floor Area and Lot Coverage Zoning District R-2 R-3 R-4 Density, minimum (dwellings per net acre) 5 5 8 Lot coverage, maximum2 40%3 40%3 50%3 Floor area ratio, maximum4 0.75:1 1:1 1.5:1 Notes: 1. In all residential zoning districts for those lots used to satisfy the requirements of division 38.380, not more than 60 percent of the lot area can be covered by principal and accessory buildings. When a larger lot has a portion of its total dwellings subject to the requirements of division 38.380, either directly or inherited from a previous subdivision, the portion used for those dwellings may have up to 60 percent of the lot area covered by principal and accessory buildings. 3. The maximum lot coverage for townhouses and rowhouses: a. R-1, R-2, R-3, and RMH districts: 50 percent. b. R-4 and townhouses complying with affordable housing provisions of division 38.380 of this chapter: 85 percent. 4. Floor area ratio adjustments: a. For townhouse developments, the floor area ratio standard applies to all townhouse lots. Designated common area specifically associated with the townhouses may be used as applicable site area in determining compliance with the floor area ratio requirement. b. Dwellings used to satisfy requirements of division 38.380 of this chapter are allowed a 25 percent increase in allowable floor area ratio. Table 38.320.030.C Maximum building height permitted in residential zoning districts (in feet). 210 Staff Report for 18-438 Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment Page 26 of 26 Roof pitch in feet Maximum Height R-2 R-3 R-4 Less than 3:12 24 32 34 3:12 or greater but less than 6:12 28 38 38 6:12 or greater but less than 9:12 32 40 42 Equal to or greater than 9:12 36 42 44 APPENDIX E - OWNER INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF Owners: Glen Haven Properties Inc., 1516 West Babcock Street Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59715 Applicant: Glen Haven Properties Inc., 1516 West Babcock Street Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59715 Representative: C&H Engineering and Surveying Inc., 1091 Stoneridge Drive, Bozeman, MT 59715 Report By: Melissa Pope, Assistant Planner, Department of Community Development 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. Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment application materials. 211 A1 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION PROJECT IMAGE PROJECT INFORMATION Project name: Project type(s): Description: Street address: Zip code: Zoning: Gross lot area: Block frontage: Number of buildings: Type and Number of dwellings: Non-residential building size(s): (in stories) Non-residential building height(s): Number of parking spaces: Afordable housing (Y/N): Cash in lieu of parkland (Y/N): VICINITY MAP CITY USE ONLY Submittal date: Application fle number: Planner: DRC required (Y/N): Revision Date: Development Review Application A1 Page 1 of 3 Revision Date: 5.16.18 REQUIRED FORMS: Varies by project type, PLS 212 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION 1. PROPERTY OWNER Name: Full address (with zip code): Phone: Email: 2. APPLICANT Name: Full address (with zip code): Phone: Email: 3. REPRESENTATIVE Name: Full address (with zip code): Phone: Email: 4. SPECIAL DISTRICTS Overlay District: Neighborhood Conservation None Urban Renewal District: Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast North Park None 5. CERTIFICATIONS AND SIGNATURES This application must be signed by both the applicant(s) and the property owner(s) (if diferent) 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 is true and correct to the best of my (our) knowledge. Certifcation 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 fnal plan may result in delays of occupancy or costs to correct noncompliance. continued on next page Development Review Application A1 Page 2 of 3 Revision Date: 5.16.18 REQUIRED FORMS: Varies by project type, PLS 213 214 ZMA Zone Map Amendment Required Materials ZMA Page 1 of 2 Revision Date 1-26-18 Required Forms: A1, N1 Recommended Forms: Required Forms: ZONE MAP AMENDMENT REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS 3 total sets are required that include 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets. This application is only for a proposed zone map amendment to in association with annexation. If an annexation is associated with the map amendment, see form ANNX. Complete and signed development review application form A1. Plan sets that include all items required in the zone map amendment checklist below. Standard application sets required plan sizes: 2 sets that include full size 24 x 36 inch plans 1 set that include 11 x 17 inch plans 2 digital versions of all materials (JPEG or PDF) on separate CD-ROM’s or USB drive. Individual files must be provided at 5MB or less in size. Files shall be named according to naming protocol. Notes: All plans must be drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8½ x 11 inches or larger than 24 x 36 inches. The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used, they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Plans that are rolled or not bound into sets will not be accepted. NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1 and materials. APPLICATION FEE Base fee: $1,888 Plus: $58 per acre ZONE MAP AMENDMENT CRITERIA 1. A thorough project narrative including a detailed response to the following: a. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the growth policy? How? b. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire and other dangers? How? c. Will the new zoning promote public health, public safety and general welfare? How? d. Will the new zoning facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? How? e. Will the new zoning provide reasonable provision of adequate light and air? How? f. Will the new zoning have an effect on motorize and non-motorized transportation systems? How? g. Does the new zoning promote compatible urban growth? How? h. Does the new zoning promote the character of the district? How? i. Does the new zoning address the affected area’s peculiar suitability for particular uses? How? j. Was the new zoning adopted with a view to conserving the values of buildings? How? k. Does the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area? 2. If map amendment, provide an exhibit of the property to be modified. Provide existing zoning designation and the proposed land use designation. The exhibit should include the legal limits of the property and size in square feet and acreage. If adjacent to a right of way the zoning should extend to the centerline of the right of way. 215 216 217 METES AND BOUNDS LEGAL DESCRIPTION #171283– MOONRISE MEADOWS SUBDIVISION 2-1 Metes and Bounds Legal Description DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED R-4 ZONING The Tract of Land Described in Doc. No. 2046120, and the adjacent portion of W. Babcock Street, conveyed to the City of Bozeman according to Document No. 2190840, located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 5 East of P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, all described as follows: Beginning at the southwest corner of the Tract of Land Described in Doc. No. 204612; thence northerly 002°07'45", assumed azimuth from north, 285.72 feet along the east line of BABCOCK MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PHASE 2; thence easterly 090°50'03" azimuth, 110.00 feet, along the south line of the Tract of Land Described in Doc. No. 2537433; then northerly 002°07'42" azimuth, 149.60 feet along the eastern line of the Tract of Land Described in Doc. No. 2537433 and its northerly extension to the centerline of W. Babcock Street; thence easterly 090°49'51" azimuth, 189.98 feet along the centerline of W. Babcock Street; thence southerly 180°50'03" azimuth, 45.00 feet to the northeast corner of the Tract of Land Described in Doc. No. 2046120; thence southerly 182°02'01" azimuth, 390.13 feet along the west line of BABCOCK MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PHASE 1; thence westerly 270°48'04" azimuth, 301.65 feet along the boundary of said BABCOCK MEADOWS SUBDIVISION PHASE 2B, to the Point of Beginning. Area = 114,624 square feet, 2.6314 acres or 10,648.9 square meters. Subject to existing easements. 218 Page 1 of 2 Adjoining Property Owners: S11, T02 S, R05 E, ACRES 2.6, TRACT 24 W2W2NE4SW4 Bozeman, MT WESTLAKE RUSSELL EUGENE 3411 SUMMER CUTOFF RD BOZEMAN, MT 59715-9375 WILLOW SUB, S11, T02 S, R05 E, BLOCK 1, Lot 1, Lot 2, & BLOCK 2, Lot 2 PLAT J-232 NOT CONTIGUOUS MORGAN INVESTMENTS LLC 76 SAKO CT BOZEMAN, MT 59718-8438 TRACT 2 NW4 SEC 11 2S 5E 1.097AC COS 2276 MORGAN ANNEX TO BZN NOT CONTIGUOUS SNYDER PATRICIA ANN PO BOX 534 BOCA RATON, FL 33429-0534 WILLOW SUB, S11, T02 S, R05 E, BLOCK 2, Lot 1, PLAT J-232 NOT CONTIGUOUS TREASURE CANYON LLC 1490 HARPER PUCKETT RD BOZEMAN, MT 59718-8876 WESTGATE SUB, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot1, Lot 2, PLAT J-177 NOT CONTIGUOUS BABCOCK PLACE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 2331 GUERNEVILLE RD SANTA ROSA, CA 95403-4122 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, ACRES 2.41, PARK AREAS IN SW4 NOT CONTIGUOUS LEIBLI THOMAS L & VIRGINIA L 10115 MISSISSIPPI BLVD NW COON RAPIDS, MN 55433-4533 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 40, ACRES 0.19, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS GILKERSON MICHAEL J & LAURA 115 VIRGINIA WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59718-1838 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 39, ACRES 0.18, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS SAVAGE DONOVAN L & JODY L 121 VIRGINIA WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59718-1838 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 38, ACRES 0.176, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS JAGER JOHN HEYWOOD & KAREN KAY 22122 LINDA DR TORRANCE, CA 90503-6257 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 37, ACRES 0.18, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS CAVANAUGH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 7129 N DRUMHELLER ST Page 2 of 2 CHIUCHIOLO AMY 208 DONNA AVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3662 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 47, ACRES 0.2, PLAT J-314 NOT CONTIGUOUS BECKER ANDREW E & KATIE C 202 DONNA AVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3662 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 46, ACRES 0.22, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS FRENCH JOHN BRADLEY 3325 W BABCOCK ST BOZEMAN, MT 59718-2684 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 45, ACRES 0.21, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS TOMLINSON JACOB 128 DONNA AVE BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3664 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 44, ACRES 0.18, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS MONTEE TIMOTHY S & TAMI J 44 HITCHING POST RD BOZEMAN, MT 59715-9241 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 43, ACRES 0.16, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS ADSEM DUANE E 1201 HIGHLAND BLVD APT A107 BOZEMAN, MT 59715-5906 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 42, ACRES 0.15, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS LELEVIER BERNADETTE 25450 SW NEWLAND RD WILSONVILLE, OR 97070-9776 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 41, ACRES 0.19, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS ZIMMERMAN ROBIN 3006 W BABCOCK ST BOZEMAN, MT 59718-2650 S11, T02 S, R05 E, ACRES 0.297, TR C AS DESIG ON ASSR'S PLATS W2W2NE4SW4 BEING 110' X 150' LESS RW CONTIGUOUS G:\c&h\18\180334\Zone Map Amendment\City Adjoiners -180334.doc 220 0.3 8,534 Miles This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and Feet information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. 0 994 Legend 497 Location 994 C&H Engineering and Surveying 09/10/2018 Created By: Created For: Date: Vicinity Map - Mountain Vista ZMA Street Names City Limits 221 honesty integrity solutions 115 east oak street bozeman montana 59715 www.arch118.com November 7, 2018 City of Bozeman Department of Community Development 20 East Olive Street Bozeman, MT 59771 Re: Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment – 2928 West Babcock Street, Bozeman, MT We believe the proposed zone change is in accordance with the City’s goals of diverse, affordable-income housing types, and infill. A slightly higher density at this site; which has good vehicular access (Babcock, collector street), immediate adjacency to recreational trail (access to Bozeman Pond) and nearby community services (Gallatin Valley Mall and other services along Main Street/Huffine); will not detrimentally affect the existing neighborhood and community fabric. The applicant intends to build apartments on the parcel that will be more affordable for those with moderate incomes. There is no current plan to subdivide this parcel due to the size and shape of the property. The proposed Zone Map Amendment (ZMA) is therefore needed. Recognizing the subjective nature of the questions below, our interpretation of the discussion at the October 22, 2018 City Commission meeting, and the understanding that support is needed for a ZMA, we offer the following for consideration. We hope the Planning Department agrees with our opinions and is supportive of this request. A thorough project narrative including a detailed response to the following: a. Is the new zoning designed in accordance with the growth policy? How? i Yes. Figure 3-1 (revised 6/1/09) of the Bozeman Community Plan (BCP) identifies the future land use as Residential. Proposal is to amend from R-2 (residential moderate density) to R-4 (residential high density). Currently, the parcel is surrounded by R-3 (residential medium density), so the request for R-4 is a reasonable increase while supporting infill and greater density goals. We agree that Bozeman’s “sense of place will be strengthened through development which fills in existing gaps” (BCP page 3-3), and the intent of the project is aligned with this goal. As identified on BCP page 3-6, “Infill development….is preferred.” Further, “as our community’s population changes our housing supply must also change to accommodate it” (BCP page 6-1). This proposal specifically addresses the Housing Goal Objective 1.3, Objective 2.1, Objective 2.3, Objective 3.1, and Objective 3.3 (BCP pages 6-3 thru 6-4). It is also uniquely located to address the majority (if not all) of the desirable attributes identified in the 2007 citizen panels on BCP page 6-5. b. Will the new zoning secure safety from fire and other dangers? How? i Yes. No significant changes to existing safety or other dangers will occur due to the proposed amendment. As an infill site, the project will be subject to latest fire and community safety development requirements. Site is within 1 mile of Fire Station #2 and 1.5 mile of Station #3. It is readily accessible via Babcock Street. c. Will the new zoning promote public health, public safety and general welfare? How? i Yes. No significant changes to existing public health, safety, or welfare will occur due to the proposed amendment. However, increased density adjacent to the recreation trail increases the access potential. Site is within walking/biking distance to existing recreational areas (Bozeman Pond and Kirk Park). The property is directly serviced by a collector street (Babcock Street). Future traffic from the property is anticipated to access directly to this collector street and will not be routed through local residential neighborhoods. 222 honesty integrity solutions 115 east oak street bozeman montana 59715 www.arch118.com d. Will the new zoning facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements? How? i Yes. No significant change to facilitation of adequate transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements will occur due to the proposed amendment. As a relatively small infill site, major improvements to existing infrastructure, schools, parks, etc are not anticipated. City of Bozeman water and sanitary sewer mains have been stubbed into the property and will be extended to service the future proposed development. Babcock Street (collector street) is readily accessible along the north end of the property. e. Will the new zoning provide reasonable provision of adequate light and air? How? i Yes. No significant change to adequate light and air will occur due to the proposed amendment. Increased density on the site will be designed in accordance with the latest development and building codes. f. Will the new zoning have an effect on motorize and non-motorized transportation systems? How? i Yes. An increased potential density will have a minor impact on the existing motorized and non-motorized transportation systems. However, minor impacts to these existing systems is favorable compared to needing new systems in outlying greenfield areas. g. Does the new zoning promote compatible urban growth? How? i Yes. The proposed R-4 designation is compatible with the adjacent R-3 zoning and a higher-density housing type in this location promotes the urban growth as identified in the BCP (see question (a.) above). h. Does the new zoning promote the character of the district? How? i Yes. The proposed R-4 designation is compatible with the surrounding R-3 zoning. The character of the district will be in accordance with the latest development and building codes. Nearby development includes Manufactured Homes, Apartment Buildings, and Single Family Residences. The intent of the project is to enhance and supplement the character of the neighborhood. We believe a change in zoning, by itself, will not affect the character; however through context-sensitive and context-compatible improvements the neighborhood character evolves and is enhanced. i. Does the new zoning address the affected area’s peculiar suitability for particular uses? How? i Yes. As an infill site surrounded mostly by R-3 zoning, the location is suitable for increased density. j. Was the new zoning adopted with a view to conserving the values of buildings? How? i Yes. No significant change to the values of buildings will occur due to the proposed amendment. It is anticipated nearby property values (1980’s & early 1990’s development) will increase as new development replaces an aged home and garage/shop. k. Does the new zoning encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area? i We believe an R-4 zoning designation, increase density, diverse housing types, and affordable housing within the existing jurisdictional area is appropriate. Sincerely, Scott Hedglin, AIA, NCARB, LEED AP Principal, Architecture118 Montana License #2635 223 t 224 From: Andy Becker To: Melissa Pope Cc: "Becker, Katie (katie.becker@bsd7.org)"; Joseph Little (joe@clearbluecommunication.com); Agenda Subject: Protest procedures/Mountain Vista Zoning Map Amendment Date: Monday, December 03, 2018 12:07:04 PM Hello Melissa, My name is Andy Becker, I live at 202 Donna Avenue, here in Bozeman. I am wondering if you can shed some light on the proper protest procedures for the above Zoning Map Amendment. I have read through the MCA Titles concerning the above, and quite frankly, am surprised this is even on the docket. In my opinion, there are some clear departures from what the MCA lays out as proper guidelines to rezone per 76-2-304, as well as a departure from 76-2-302. Will email correspondence from the surrounding community members be sufficient, or do we need to protest in an official letter from EACH of the the property owners within 150’ of the proposed change? I am fairly certain the surrounding property owners will be well above the 25% listed in the MCA requirements, and want to be sure everyone is sufficiently accounted for. Also, is there a way to obtain a proposed site plan, building layout, and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for the proposed project? Thank you very much for any information and I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks, Andy Becker I Project Manager C 406.530.4223 E abecker@hultengccm.com W hultengccm.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute it. Please notify the sender by E-Mail at the address shown and delete the original message. Thank you. 225 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 From: Chris Mehl To: Agenda Subject: FW: Glean Haven Zoning Proposal 2928 Babcock Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 10:05:04 AM Chris Mehl Bozeman Deputy Mayor cmehl@bozeman.net 406.581.4992 ________________________________________ From: laura lu [lauralu354@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 9:29 AM To: Chris Mehl Subject: Glean Haven Zoning Proposal 2928 Babcock 12/11/2018 Dear Chris, I am writing to express to protest the proposed R4 rezoning of the lot behind my home at 115 Virginia Way in Bozeman. My property is directly behind this area 2928 W. Babcock. Changing the original R2 zoning to R4, will create irreparable damage to this unique neighborhood and it’s home owners including the elementary school near by. This neighborhood fought for this little area to be left as a single family housing and won in 2001. I was saddened and shocked when I received this proposal to change that agreement to R4 which would completely change the neighborhood to high density, to an already very small area. Although the current land owners of the proposed area, wanted high density in 2001, it was denied due to theses same concerns. R-2 zoning is more characteristic of the existing neighborhood as it has maintained duplexes, triplexes and single household units. This will better maintain the compatibility and character of the surrounding area in overall land uses and zoning. R-4 zoning will cause overcrowding of the land due to the size of the building and amount of occupants. Due to the already small area, high density housing would transform this beautifully diverse area from a quiet neighborhood to a crowded and higher traffic area with higher traffic and higher risk of crime. This zoning will not promote health and general welfare for the school within walking distance. There was no elementary school in 2001 but because one sits right around the corner from this land, now traffic and proximity will be an big issue for small children crossing the already busy W.Babcock. I understand the need for affordable housing in Bozeman and I ask the city planners and city commissioners to continue to maintain that balance between high density housing and maintaining safe and not overly crowded neighborhoods. By allowing a change in zoning from R2 to R4 in this neighborhood, this balance would dip into the side of over population and safety risks. This is why we all fought so hard for it in 2001 and ultimately R-4 high density, was denied. 235 I write because rarely are we given the opportunity to do anything about the problems and the changes that we see in the world today and I care very much for this little neighborhood. Our home here has been our own refuge from the craziness of life, as we managed to hold on to it through the economic recession and my husband’s deployments. By developing apartments in this lot and changing the zoning, we would essentially loose the heart of our family and community that we have lovingly built for over twenty years. Respectfully, Laura and Michael Gilkerson 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 Date: 16 December 2018 AITN: Honorable City of Bozeman Mayor and City Commissign, City of Bozeman Zoning Commission Members, and City of Bozeman Planning Staff. RE: Application #18-438 - Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment, 2928 West Babcock Street Dear sirs and madams: Please accept this letter of PROTEST regarding the Application #18-438 - Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment,2928 West Babcock Street. The property in question is currently zoned R-2 and owned by Glen Haven Properties, Inc., which has proposed a higher density zoning district designation of R-4 through the above mentioned ZoneMap Amendment application process. I purchased my home at208 DonnaAve, Bozeman, MT 59718 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 28, S 1 1, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 47 , Acres 0.2, PLAI J-314 and am within a 150' radius of the aforementioned property. There are several issues of concern, not only to those directly adjacent, but to those owning surrounding properties in the vicinity within the R-3 zoning designation. Given the location of the site and the character of established neighborhoods, those concerns have been outlined as follows: 1) In the issue of whether a rezoning constitutes illegal "spot zoning" as discussed by the Montana Supreme Court in Plains Grains, LP vs. Board of County Commissioners of Cascade County as well as Little vs. Board of County Commissioners, the court determined that the presence of all three of the following criteria will generally indicate that a given situation constitutes "spot zoning": A) Is the proposed use significantly dffirent from the prevailing land uses in the area? YES - the prevailing land uses in the area are single-family homes on lots designed, sized, and intended for single-family construction. B) Is the area requestedfor the rezone rather small in terms of the number of landowners benefitedfrom the proposed change? YES - the proposed zoning designation has been requested by a single landowner and applies to a single lot that is larger than those adjacent and in the near vicinity of the parcel. Therefore the amendment will benefit only the developer. C) Would the change be in the nature of "special legislation" designed to benefit only one or afew landowners at the expense of the surounding landowners or the general public? YES - the change in zoning would benefit only the landowner and would be a detriment and expense to the surrounding landowners with regard to possible traffic congestion impacts on a designated Collector Street and intended to help alleviate Arterial Street traffic to achieve ultimate destinations; possibly through residential neighborhoods (adopted City of Bozeman Transportation Plan). The intersections of Virginia Way and Hunters Way with Babcock Street are of primary concern as Babcock Street has not been updated since 247 approximately 2006. A TRAFFIC STUDY SHOULD BE REQURED TO BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL AS ADEQUATE HEALTH, SAFETY AND SERVICES MAY BE LESS AVAILABLE per 76-2-304 and76-2-302 M.C.A (for example - greater length of time fo,r ambulatory or fire services to respond to surrounding sites, pedestrians and proximity to the school). Property valuations are also at issue as the property was originally zoned by the City at a lower density of R-2. The adopted City of Bozeman Growth Policy encourages development of urban density housing, but this is to be balanced against other community priorities and "NEWAND EXISTING DEVELOPMENT MUST CO-EXISTAND REMAIN IN BALANCE'' (SEE Appendix K for definition criteria). Building, parking lot, and street lighting regarding glare on neighboring properties. Access into and out of the site. Parking concerns with regard to required number of spaces versus the number of actual tenants and each oftheir vehicles. Amy Chiuchiolo CC: Planner Pope, City of Bozeman Community Development, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771 (hard copy) 20F,. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715 via email : mpope@bo zeman.net via email: agenda@bozeman.net 2) 3) 4) 5) Sincerely, 248 From: C. R. Esbjornson To: Agenda Subject: Public Comment on Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment, Project # 18-438 Date: Sunday, December 16, 2018 11:02:51 PM Attachments: Mountain Vista Project #18-438 Public Comment.pdf To the Bozeman Zoning Commission and the Bozeman City Commission, Attached please find our public comment related to the Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment application, Project # 18-438. As homeowners at 236 Marilyn Ct., Bozeman, MT 59718, the request to rezone the Mountain Vista parcel from R-2 to R-4 would negatively effect our subdivision and our property values. We'd appreciate your careful consideration of the attached comment. Please acknowledge receipt of this email. Thank you. Respectfully, Carl D. Esbjornson Rilla D. Esbjornson 236 Marilyn Ct. Bozeman, MT 59178 249 Carl D. and Rilla D. Esbjornson 236 Marilyn Ct. Bozeman, MT 59178 Phone: 406-585-0623 Email: cresbjornson@gmail.com City of Bozeman Department of Community Development P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman MT 59771-1230 December 16, 2018 Re: Public Comment Concerning Mountain Vista Zone Map Amendment, Project #18-438 We are the legal homeowners of 236 Marilyn Ct. Bozeman, MT, 59718 in the Babcock Meadows Subdivision with the legal description of Babcock Meadows PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 12, ACRES 0.25, PLAT J-205. We write to register our strongest possible objections to the application for a zone map amendment from R-2 Residential Two-Household Medium Density to R-4 Residential High Density for the property at 2928 West Babcock Street, Bozeman MT. This property is surrounded on three sides by the Babcock Meadows Subdivision and is bordered by exclusively single-family dwellings to the west, south, and east of this parcel, with a narrow linear park and seasonal creek which separates this parcel from the single-family homes to the east. These single-family homes were built in an R-3 zone and nearby property is zoned R-3. As a subdivision, several years ago we objected to the Mountain Vista parcel being rezoned as R-4. The conditions for which the City Commission saw fit to reject the rezoning application at that time have not changed today. As then City Commissioner Marcia Youngman said, when the Mountain Vista parcel of land came up for a zoning amendment request before the Bozeman City Commission several years ago, our subdivision is already “fragile” when it comes to maintaining the quality and character of our single-family home neighborhood. The density and building height allowances for R-4 zoning is not appropriate for our single-family home neighborhood. To rezone this parcel from R-2 to R-4, you would be effectively approving the development of apartment buildings on the Mountain Vista parcel of land. Under current R-4 zoning, 20+ apartment units could potentially be developed on this property (at 5-8 units per acre), and with building heights that would overwhelm the heights of the existing homes that are adjacent to this parcel. This poses serious concerns for our entire neighborhood, and in particular, for the homeowners whose properties are directly adjacent to this parcel of land. Pg. 1 of 2 250 The modular home park, Babcock Vista to our east, has already compromised the character of our neighborhood. If apartments are built on the Mountain Vista parcel, Babcock Meadows Subdivision could see a significant loss in property values for the single-family homes in this neighborhood. We continue to struggle with too many of the homes in this neighborhood becoming rentals, which have caused some problems with loud parties, failure of some properties to be well cared for, increased noise, increased traffic, as well as parking congestion on our neighborhood’s streets. Invariably, whenever apartment buildings are approved in Bozeman, these new developments are never required to build adequate parking facilities, and on-street parking becomes very problematic on adjacent streets. In addition, with all the development to the west of Babcock Meadows Subdivision, adding a high-density R-4 parcel to our neighborhood will increase traffic congestion on Babcock Street, which is already problematic at peak use time. We urge you to reject this zone map amendment application, as it is not in the best interest of existing homeowners and our property values in this neighborhood for a high-density R-4 development to be approved on this parcel of land. Sincerely, Carl D. Esbjornson Rilla D. Esbjornson Pg. 2 of 2 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR A ZONE MAP AMENDMENT A Zone Map Amendment application was submitted to the City of Bozeman Department of Community Development to rezone an existing lot totaling approximately 2.63 acres (gross) / 114,624 square feet from R-2 Residential Two-Household Medium Density to R-4 Residential High Density as allowed by Section 38.260 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. The property is generally located at the intersection of West Babcock Street and Michael Grove Avenue, addressed as 2928 West Babcock Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The property is legally described as Tract 24 located in the W ½ of the W ½ of the NE ¼ of the SW ¼ of Section 11, Township 2 South, Range 5 East, P.M.M., City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, 59715. The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the requested amendment to the City of Bozeman Zoning Map proposed by the: applicant and property owner Glen Haven Properties Inc., 1516 West Babcock Street, Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59715. At the public hearing the City Commission may act to approve, modify, or reject the proposal or continue the public hearing to another date. The City Commission may revise any of the proposed amendments referred in this notice during the public hearing process. The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal referred to in this notice 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 (including the application number, 18-438) ; 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. The complete text of the proposal is available through the Department Community Development, 20 E Olive Street, Bozeman MT 59715; 406-582-2260. The proposal may be revised as the public review process proceeds. The City invites the public to comment in writing and to attend the public hearings. Written comments may be directed to the City of Bozeman, Department of Community Development, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman, MT 59771-1230. Comments may also be emailed to agenda@bozeman.net. For those who require accommodations for disabilities, please contact Mike Gray, City of Bozeman ADA Coordinator, 582-3232 (voice), 582-3203 (TDD). Please reference Mountain Vista zone map amendment, File 18-438 in all correspondence. Use QR code below to track City review of project. PUBLIC HEARING BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION Monday, January 7, 2019 6:00 p.m. Commission Meeting Room 121 N. Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana PUBLIC HEARING ZONING COMMISSION Tuesday, December 18, 2018 6:00 p.m. Commission Meeting Room 121 N Rouse Avenue Bozeman, Montana 258 SPOKANE, WA 99208-5018 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 36, ACRES 0.19, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS SPALDING KIRK A 207 VIRGINIA WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59718-1842 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 35, ACRES 0.17, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS STIFF TONY & JENNIFER 1 ANNETTE PARK DR BOZEMAN, MT 59715-9206 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 1, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 34, ACRES 0.16, PLAT J-205 NOT CONTIGUOUS DEMAREE LARRY F & DEBRA K & ANGELA 240 KATHRYN CT BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3660 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 52, ACRES 0.2, PLAT J-314 NOT CONTIGUOUS HOMPESCH ROBIN 234 KATHRYN CT BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3660 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 51, ACRES 0.25, PLAT J-314 NOT CONTIGUOUS DRAB STEVEN F & CHRISTA J 228 KATHRYN CT BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3660 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 50, ACRES 0.25, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS LITTLE JOSEPH W 222 KATHRYN CT BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3660 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 49, ACRES 0.23, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS BENNETT JOHN D & KAREN P 216 LILLIAN WAY BOZEMAN, MT 59718-3659 BABCOCK MEADOWS SUB PH 2B, S11, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 48, ACRES 0.3, PLAT J-314 CONTIGUOUS 219