HomeMy WebLinkAbout18559 Misc UDC edits SRPage 1 of 15
18559, Staff Report for the Miscellaneous “Pile C” UDC Zone Text
Amendments
Public Hearing Dates: Design Review Board, April 10, 2019
Zoning Commission, April 16, 2019
City Commission, May 6, 2019
Project Description: Zone text amendments to adjust development standards, improve
clarity of the text, add bicycle parking standards, and clarify building placement
standards for multiple frontage situations.
Project Location: These amendments apply to the entire City and all zoning districts as
detailed in the text.
Recommendation: Approval
Zoning Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby
adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 18559 and move to
recommend that the City commission adopt Ordinance 2014 zone text amendment.
Zoning Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby
adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 18559 and move to
recommend that the City commission adopt Ordinance 2019 zone text amendment.
City Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, Zoning Commission recommendation, and all the
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for
application 18559 and move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 2014 zone text
amendment.
City Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, Zoning Commission recommendation, and all the
information presented, I hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for
application 18559 and move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 2019 zone text
amendment.
Report Date: March 26, 2019
Staff Contacts: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Agenda Item Type: Action – Legislative
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 2 of 15
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
Zoning Commission Recommendation............................................................................... 8
City Commission Alternatives ............................................................................................ 8
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES .................................................................................................... 9
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ...................................... 10
SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................................... 10
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ....................................................................... 10
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 13
APPENDIX A - PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................... 14
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 14
APPENDIX C - APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF .................... 14
FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 15
ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 15
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Project Summary
The City of Bozeman generally updated Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code with
adoption in January 2019. The revised development code became effective on March 31,
2018. Based on a year of experience of applying the code a number of improvements and
revisions have been identified as necessary to achieve the desired outcome, correct
omissions, and continue evolving the code as directed by the City Commission. On October
22, 2018, staff presented numerous suggested code amendments and additional larger policy
questions for future code amendments. Based on the direction provided by the Commission
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 3 of 15
and staff identified edits Ordinance 2014 and 2019 were prepared to meet the demands of the
known corrections, additions, and improvements.
Two ordinances (2014 and 2019) were created for consideration to facilitate review and
possible adoption. Ordinance No. 2014 generally includes those specific changes detailed in
the October 22, 2018 Commission memo. Ordinance No. 2019 includes revisions to block
frontage standards for buildings facing multiple streets and other modifications generally
related to the subject matter. Not all policy items listed in the October 22, 2018 memo are
addressed with these two ordinances. Items not included require additional review to ensure
the desired outcome is achieved and these amendments are deemed important for the ongoing
function of the Department and reducing effort in the review process.
The reasoning behind creating two ordinances for consideration are three fold. First, timing.
The edits in Ordinance 2014 ought to be in effect as soon as possible for efficient use of
resources and clarity in the development community. Secondly, through administrative
interpretation staff can continue processing applications related to items in Ordinance 2019.
Finally, simplicity. Separating the content into two medium sized ordinances is more
digestible and people will be better able to understand the changes and focus questions.
Policy amendments
1 SUP for on-site alcohol sales in B-2M. The draft of the UDC
adopted by the Commission through ordinance 1978 requires a
conditional use permit for onsite consumption of alcohol in the B-
2M district. The review process for the same use was changed to a
special use permit for some other districts. This change would
modify the review process in the B-2M district for on-premise
consumption of alcohol to a special use permit
Ordinance
2019,
section 1.
2 Cash-in-lieu of parkland density cap. Not divisible if less than one-
acre parcel. The current code includes a maximum amount of park
to be dedicated with any residential project. This maximum is
affected by the size of the parcel and the number of homes in the
project. Higher density, usually smaller, lots reach the maximum
and allow a greater number of homes to not have to provide park
or its equivalent. This change will maintain a maximum cap.
However it will modify how lot size affects the dedication
requirement so that lots under one acre have a dedication
requirement that more closely parallels less intensive development.
This will require greater payment of money from some higher
density developments
Not
included
with this
group of
edits.
3 Detached household porch encroachment, enclosure, and meeting
garage location. See strategic code amendment #3 below. The
revised code encourages greater utilization of land and decreases
front yard setbacks for residential structures. To allow for
additional parking in front of garages and to minimize impacts to
adjacent properties garages are required to be setback a minimum
Ordinance
2014,
section 5.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 4 of 15
of 20 feet and the front façade of the house must be at least four
feet in front the garage. Current code does not allow a front porch
to encroach into the front setback or count as the “front façade” of
the house. This could allow porches closer to the street.
4 Revise the introductory paragraphs in section 38.300.100,
38.300.110, and 38.300.120 to make explicit the presumption that
uses within districts and also within adjacent districts are
compatible when the standards of the Unified Development Code
have been met. Currently the text only addresses compatibility
within districts.
Not
included
with this
group of
edits.
5 Describe the nature, scope or meaning of development context in
relation to development applications for site plan and commercial
and residential certificate of appropriateness applications. Section
38.230.100.A,7, subsection a and b, site plan review criteria
references “neighborhood identity” and is the development
“compatible with, and sensitivity to, the immediate environment of
the site and the adjacent neighborhood and other approved
development…”
Not
included
with this
group of
edits.
Focused code amendments
1 Table 38.320.030.B. Minimum lot width. The R-2 district
allows an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) on a lot of 50 feet
wide or 40 feet wide when the lot is adjacent to an alley
and vehicle access is taken only from that alley. However,
the R-2 and R-3 districts are more restrictive. Should this
standard be increased to reflect the intent of the R-1 district
and harmonized with the R-2 and R-3 lot width standard.
Ordinance 2019,
section 2.
2 Table 38.320.050. Non-residential form and intensity
standards. Footnote #1 should say 2,700 square feet, not
3,000 to be in harmony with the other zoning districts.
Ordinance 2014,
section 3.
3 Section 38.350.050.A. Permitted encroachments. Clarify
application of zero lot line provisions of 38.350.050.A to
allow ADU and accessory buildings on shared property
boundary and how the setback plane provision of
38.360.060.G. is applied.
Ordinance 2014,
section 6.
4 No accessory buildings allowed between the front lot line
and the primary building façade. By definition of
development standard. Historically, City code prohibited
accessory structures to be located in front of the primary
residential structure. Former Section 38.18.050.B stated,
“Accessory buildings, uses, or equipment shall not be
Ordinance 2014,
section 7.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 5 of 15
stored or constructed between the front lot line and required
front building line.” The revised development code
eliminated the term “front yard”.
5 Section 38.350.050.A.4. Setback & height encroachments,
limitations, and exceptions. Revise to allow covered
porches to encroach five feet into the front setback for all
residential districts. This will allow an effective 10 foot
minimum separation from the property line to the front
edge of the porch. This will likely be measured to the
nearest point such as the eve line to prevent conflicts with
utility easements. Remove reference to six foot porch.
Ordinance 2014,
section 5.
6 Section 38.360.040 clarify supplemental ADU provisions
and what is allowed between zones. Table 38.310.030.A
details in which zoning districts attached and detached
ADU’s are permitted. Section 38.360.040 list special
development standards for attached and detached ADU’s.
The relationship and function of these two section could be
improved to be more transparent.
Ordinance 2014,
section 8.
7 Section 38.360.210.B. Single, two, three, and four-
household dwellings. The intent and purpose suggests the
buildings should face the street. Clarify that building and
entrance must face the street.
Ordinance 2014,
section 9.
8 Table 510.030.C. Landscape block frontage. Clarify table
38.510.030.C for Landscape Block frontage building
placement. References standard zone setbacks which are
more restrictive. Block frontage allows 10 foot setback
while base zoning standard requires 15 feet. Either confirm
the intent and clarify the table’s application or direct a
more intensive amendment to lessen front yard setbacks in
residential districts. Staff suggests the Block Frontage
setbacks apply to apartment buildings to better utilize
available land.
Ordinance 2019,
section 6
9 Section 38.510.030.K. Block frontage classification on
multiple street fronts. Add new section or revise block
frontage section that clarifies order of preference to clearly
state that that one or more street frontages must be the front
of every building in order to prevent buildings oriented to a
parking lot.
Ordinance 2019,
section 4.
10 Section 38.520.060. On-site residential open space. Suggest
adding “and commercial” to heading. Section includes
subsection C, usable commercial open space. Clarify
application to mixed use buildings.
Ordinance 2014,
section 10.
11 Section 38.540.020.L. Pedestrian facilities in parking lots.
Sec. 38.540.020.L Pedestrian facilities in parking lots. The
Ordinance 2014,
section 11.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 6 of 15
concrete sidewalks walk must be a minimum of 5’, not 3’
to meet operational needs of pedestrians.
12 Section 38.540.030.A. Structured parking. States structure
must conform to chapters 1 – 4 of the Design Objectives
Plan. The Design Objectives Plan is no longer applicable
and the reference should be removed. In addition, all
buildings must conform to the applicable block frontage
standards in the zoning district. This reference should be
integrated with Article 5.
Ordinance 2014,
section 12.
13 Section 38.540.030.B. Clarify language, “line the parking
garage with an active use.” Subsection 1.b states, “Parking
garages that front onto streets must provide a lining of
retail, office, or residential use at the street level along the
entire street frontage.” However, the code does not specify
dimensions of such a space. Numerous development
applications have liberally interpreted this section to mean
benches, bike racks, incidental areas supporting residential
uses above street level, or non-active spaces to meet the
intent of this section.
Ordinance 2014,
section 12.
14 Section 38.540.050.A.1.a. Required parking. The reference
to table 38.540.050-6 is listed as the ADA parking
requirement which is no longer included. Delete table
reference to correct.
Ordinance 2014,
section 13.
15 Section 38.540.050.A.5 (Add this section). Bicycle parking
standards. The 2017 Transportation Plan removed the
bicycle parking standards as requested. However, these
standards were not included in the revised UDC. The intent
of the rack standards section is to ensure that required
bicycle racks are designed so that bicycles may be securely
locked to them without undue inconvenience and will be
reasonably safeguarded from accidental damage (see
attached standards, Exhibit A). Consider other related
amendments relating to placement of bicycle parking on a
site.
Ordinance 2014,
section 13.
16 Section 38.550.050.G. Tree diameter standards, acceptable
landscape materials, subparagraph 3.a. Paragraph
38.550.060.B.3.d says caliper is measured one foot above
grade. However, that section is addressing mature trees
being preserved on-site. One image addressing both
standards is needed.
Will be
corrected
through revised
image as
allowed by
section
38.110.020.
17 Section 38.560.060.C.2. Interchange zones sign permitting.
Sentence should reference “comprehensive sign permit”
and not “certificate of appropriateness” as the COA
Administratively
corrected.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 7 of 15
requirement no longer applies to entryway corridors
because the Entryway Overlay district was deleted in
January 2018.
Other amendments not listed in the October 22, 2018 Commission memo
1 Table 38.220.420, Notice requirements for application
processing to specify which requirement applies to which
process of review.
Ordinance 2014,
section 1.
2 Table 38.320.030.A of the BMC, Minimum and maximum
lot area. Revise minimum lot size for residential districts.
By motion of the Commission.
Ordinance 2014,
section 2.
3 Table 38.320.050. Table of Form and Intensity Standards—
Non-Residential and Other Mixed-Use Districts. Omitted
minimum floor to ceiling height with revised code. Replace
standard.
Ordinance 2014,
section 3
4 Table 38.320.050. Table of Form and Intensity Standards—
Non-Residential and Other Mixed-Use Districts. Revise
footnotes to improve B-1 district function and remove
residential reference standard in non-residential use table.
Ordinance 2014,
section 3.
5 Section 38.340.040.A.1.a (5). Certificate of appropriateness,
to explicitly allow photovoltaic panels as directed by
Commission during adoption of revised UDC and consistent
with current practice.
Ordinance 2014,
section 4
6 Section 38.350.050.B, Setback and height encroachments,
limitations and exceptions. Allow detached accessory
structures, including ADU’s, to utilize the zero lot line
configuration.
Ordinance 2014,
section 6
7 Section 38.700.180, BMC, defining townhouse and
townhouse cluster. Response to proposed Legislative
change. Does not change current application of standards by
the City.
Ordinance 2014,
section 14
8 Table 38.510.030.B, Storefront block frontage standards.
Clarify that the building depth for all commercial, not just
retail, use must be deep enough to accommodate a future
use.
Ordinance 2019,
section 5.
9 Section 38.520.060.C Usable commercial open space.
Remove possibility of doubling open space requirements.
Ordinance 2019,
section 8.
Unresolved Issues
None identified at this time.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 8 of 15
Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board
The Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board considered the proposed text edits under section
13 of Ordinance No. 2014 on Wednesday, January 2, 2019. The Board was supportive of the
proposed modifications and additions and recommend that the City Commission adopt the
standards.
Design Review Board Review
The Bozeman Design Review Board considered the proposed text edits on Wednesday, April
10, 2019.
Zoning Commission Recommendation
The City of Bozeman Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on April 16, 2019 and
consider the text amendment.
City Commission Alternatives
1) Adopt the ordinances as presented,
2) Direct revisions to the ordinance prior to adoption and request staff to respond with
proposed revision for consideration at a future hearing,
3) Do not adopt the ordinance, or
4) Request additional information and continue discussion on the ordinance.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 9 of 15
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES
Zoning Map – Detailed map available at Community Development and on-line
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 10 of 15
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the criteria established for a municipal code text amendment, Staff
recommends approval as submitted.
The Bozeman Area Bicycle Advisory Board considered the proposed text edits under section
13 of Ordinance No. 2014 on Wednesday, January 2, 2019. The Board was supportive of the
proposed modifications and additions and recommend that the City Commission adopt the
standards.
The Bozeman Design Review Board will conduct a public meeting on the proposal
Wednesday, April 10, 2019 in the City Commission Room, City Hall, 121 N. Rouse Avenue,
Bozeman MT at 5:30 pm.
The Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on these text amendments on April 16,
2019, at 6 pm in the City Commission room located at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman,
Montana.
The City Commission will hold a public hearing on these text amendments on May 6, 2019
in the City Commission room located at 121 N. Rouse Avenue, Bozeman, Montana.
SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following criteria. An amendment is a legislative action;
therefore, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The burden of
proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant. The criteria below
include separate findings for each text amendment where necessary.
In considering the following criteria, the analysis must show that the amendment
accomplishes zoning criteria A-D or is neutral. Zoning 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 growth policy does not dictate uses or specific standards to the level of detail
contained in the ordinance. It does identify issues and priorities for consideration and does
contain goals and objectives that are desirable outcomes. There is no prioritization of one
goal or objective over another. In determining appropriateness of a particular zoning
ordinance, the Commission needs to find a balance that best advances the interests of the
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 11 of 15
community. It is inappropriate to maximize one item to the detriment of the remainder of the
goals and objectives of the document. The City adopted the current edition of the growth
policy, the Bozeman Community Plan, in 2009. The Community Plan consists of 17 chapters
detailing community context, land use, community quality, arts and culture, economic
development to name a few. The text of Chapter 38 as amended is a balance of the various
goals and priorities in the Bozeman Community Plan and advances the plan overall.
All amendments relate to existing text, which have previously been found to support the
Growth Policy during the public hearings and Commission action on Ordinance 1978 and the
supplementary edits in Application the “Pile B”, Ordinance No. 1994, amendments reviewed
and approved by the City Commission on February 12, 2018. Each amendment is a
refinement of a standard to further the goals and objectives of the Growth Policy.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Yes. The development standards provide for identification and mitigation of uses and
development. Building construction standards, public services, urban/wildfire interface,
geotechnical standards, and other measures remain in place. Development within floodplains
is restricted. Setbacks and other development standards facilitate emergency service access.
See also criterion C.
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes. The development standards provide for identification and mitigation of uses and
development. Building construction standards, public services, urban/wildfire interface,
geotechnical standards, and other measures remain in place. Development within floodplains
is restricted. Setbacks and other development standards facilitate emergency service access.
See also criterion C.
The essential standards for provision of public services such as water and sewer will not be
modified. The balance of proposed standards are expected to prevent overcrowding or other
negative impacts.
The amendments are designed to improve the community by integrating greater
consideration of a neighborhood in particular development proposals and promote greater
variety of housing types. The amendments support the general welfare by addressing possible
impediments to full utilization of property. Therefore, this criterion is met.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks and other
public requirements.
Yes. Standards for provision of public facilities are not being altered. Standards are proposed
to accommodate parking for this use. All site development must demonstrate availability of
adequate transportation, water, sewer, and park facilities prior to approval. The regulations
are integrated with other City standards in Chapter 40 for provision of and operation of
utilities.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 12 of 15
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Yes. The basic standards for rights-of-way, dedication of parks, on-site open spaces, etc. that
affect this criterion are continued with the proposed ordinance. Minor refinements are
included to better facilitate the desired outcome of the Growth Policy by adjusting minimum
setback in certain zoning districts and allow porches in encroach into from setbacks to better
utilize land.
Minimum standards for windows and air circulation/venting remain in the building codes.
F. Effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Yes. Edits include provisions for bicycle parking on site. These amendments are intended to
facilitate safe and functional access for employees, patrons, and residences for residential
developments.
Additional amendments improve the clarity of building placement and access to buildings.
The intent is to promote an active streetscape encouraging pedestrian and alternative modes
of transportation potentially reducing vehicular traffic.
Amendments continue by reducing required parcel size for some residential uses and lot
widths in certain zoning districts. These amendments may incrementally increase density
bolstering housing supply in existing and emerging neighborhoods which, in turn, may
increase multi-modal transportation options.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Yes. The amendments promote the continued growth of the City by providing more urban
development standards. The standards, as shown in other criteria, are consistent with the
development standards and patterns of the City.
H. Character of the district.
Neutral to supportive. The amendments refine and clarify existing standards to promote the
Growth Policy. This is achieved by encouraging a more urban character and providing for
efficient use of land. No substantive change to design standards are proposed.
The edits most applicable to this criterion are those revising minimum lot widths. The edits
do not change the uses of property. They do facilitate additional construction of homes,
including accessory dwellings, on existing and future parcels of land.
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Neutral. No changes to the zoning boundaries are proposed with these amendments. The
location of zoning districts has previously been found to be appropriate. The authorized use
tables have been reviewed for consistency with the intent and purpose of individual districts
and found to be appropriate.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 13 of 15
Neutral. No changes to the zoning boundaries are proposed that would cause buildings to
become non-conforming to the district in which they are located. Some existing buildings on
smaller parcels may become conforming to zoning as a result of the edits. Other portions of
the municipal code require buildings to be maintained in a safe and secure condition to avoid
decay and public hazards. The building design standards of Article 5 minimize negative
impacts of development on adjoining properties.
The alterations suggested that may relate to conserving building value should promote a
functional site for all users and encourage a more forward looking approach to accommodate
new and existing residence of the city. Increased population and an evolving commercial
activities necessitate a built environment that allows greater flexibility and be to adapt to
future needs. The text amendments included herein partially achieve these goals by placing
buildings on a site to maximize land use, and provide clear entrances for pedestrians, and
support a diversity of ways in which people can travel to a location.
The community design standards of Article 4 ensure adequate street circulation, parks, and
other necessary features.
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area.
Yes. No changes to the zoning boundaries are proposed with these amendments. The uses
authorized in the use tables for each district are consistent with the district purpose. The
zoning boundaries are in substantial compliance with the land use map of the growth policy,
which establishes the broad policy for location of uses. As described in Criterion A, the
proposed zoning is consistent with the growth policy overall. Finally, the amendments allow
greater housing variety to meet the needs of a diverse community.
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.
For this text amendment application the applicable calculation of protesting owners would
include all owners of all properties in all districts of the City for issues affecting the entire city
such as review processes and generally applicable standards. For issues affecting a defined
subsection of the city such as an individual zoning district the calculation of protesting owners
would include all owners within the affected area. This protest does not apply to provisions
relating to subdivision review as there is no state authority for protest of subdivision regulations.
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 14 of 15
As of the writing of this report, no written protest against the changes have been received.
APPENDIX A - PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City has had zoning since 1934. The City has replaced the entirety of its zoning regulations
fifteen times since then and completed over 250 individual amendments to the text. These
regulations have developed over time as the City has grown from 6,855 in 1930 to over 46,500
today. The City Commission and Staff identified a need for a substantial revision to the zoning
regulations to catch up with changing state laws and to meet the needs of the community as it
changes from small town to a city.
The City of Bozeman generally updated Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code. The
revised development code became effective on March 31, 2018. Based on a year of experience of
applying the code a number of improvements and revisions are needed to achieve the desired
outcome, correct omissions, and continue evolving the code as directed by the City Commission.
On October 22, 2018, staff presented numerous suggested code amendments and additional
larger policy questions for future code amendments. Based on the direction provided by the
Commission and staff identified edits Ordinance 2014 and 2019 were prepared to meet the
demands of the known corrections, additions, and improvements.
Two ordinances (2014 and 2019) were created for consideration to facilitate review and possible
adoption. Ordinance No. 2014 generally includes those specific changes detailed in the October
22, 2018 Commission memo. Ordinance No. 2019 includes revisions to block frontage standards
for buildings facing multiple streets and other modifications generally related to the subject
matter. Not all policy items listed in the October 22, 2018 memo are addressed with these two
ordinances. Items not included require additional review to insure the desired outcome is
achieved and these amendments are deemed important for the ongoing function of the
Department and eliminating burdensome review process.
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
This application is for an amendment to the municipal code. Therefore, the required notice is
publication in the newspaper per Table 38.40.030, BMC. Notice was published on March 31,
2019 and April 14, 2019 in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle before the public meeting by the
Design Review Board and public hearings by the Zoning Commission and City Commission.
APPENDIX C - APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Applicant: Bozeman City Commission, P.O. Box 1230, Bozeman MT 59771
Report By: Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
18559, Staff Report for Ordinance 2014 & 2019 Text Amendments Page 15 of 15
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed by
this amendment. The City will incur periodic costs to administer the process.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. The complete application includes
presentations, notes, comments, questionnaires used to create the draft code being reviewed.
Draft Ordinance 2014
Draft Ordinance 2019
Bicycle parking standard example graphic
Zoning Commission report, when available