HomeMy WebLinkAboutConsolidated Individual Board Proposed Edits 3-17-2020 draft discussion LS Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 1 of 57
Consolidated list of Planning Board requested edits to Bozeman Community Plan – June 4th Transmittal to Logan Simpson
The edits consolidated in this list were suggested by individual Board members and staff. The first table is organized by page where a specific
edit was suggested. Edits which were grammar, typos, or clarifications that did not alter meaning are already completed. Highlights in edits were
in the originally submitted edit. First and last initial identify which Planning Board member suggested an edit.
Some edits were large enough that they don’t fit well in this table structure. Those are presented at the end of Table 1 as text blocks and cross
referenced in the table so that they appear in order for consideration.
The 2nd table is a grouped set of more overarching concepts for discussion that were proposed by individual members that don’t neatly fit onto a
single page location.
Table 1
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Cover
2019 2020 Community Plan. There’s an
issue with the cover photo that causes it
to print incorrectly on Apple computers.
ME
HH
Title will be revised.
There was a prior
growth policy called
the Bozeman 2020
plan. A different name
is desirable to avoid
confusion.
Edit made
Discuss alternate
name
Page III
Add Individual Themes to Table of
Contents
ME Edit made
Add appendices to table of contents Staff Make Edit June 3rd – Move Forward
Page 1:
Replace introductory text per submitted
comment. See page 43 of this document
for text.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward -
Hap supports removing population
table and replace with reference
to Appendices.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 2 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Replace Gallatin County population
growth chart with Bozeman growth chart.
ME Consider utility of the
chart at all, Appendix C
and D have the
population details
Make edit June 3rd – Move forward, Remove
chart and add pointer to
appendices
I would not use the 00 on this page. I
recommend just using the word
Introduction (to be consistent with the
table of contents).
CC Revise table of
contents
Edit made
Paragraph 2—I would add something
about our airport…isn’t it the busiest in
Montana?
CC It is. Is this important
enough for the
introduction to the plan
as a whole or would if
fit better in Theme 4
introduction?
Make edit May 28 – Move forward, location
less important than inclusion of
statement
Put mention into Theme 4
importance statement “Bozeman-
Yellowstone airport is the busiest
airport in the state.”
[Note, adjusted name to be
Bozeman Yellowstone
International Airport]
In general, I do not feel we have enough
pictures or graphs or sidebars in this
document to break up the text and clarify
things. So, I would put a great picture on
the top of this page (instead of the 00)
and that will necessitate putting some text
on page 2 and so I would add a graphic of
some sort or another picture at the
bottom of page 2. We could even
graphically depict population growth in
Bozeman since 1990?
CC Suggest placing image
on the facing page to
allow a larger image
and keep introduction
consolidated.
Suggest addition of
appropriate images
after City Commission
has finalized text so
images are relevant
and helpful with final
text.
Make
recommendation to
Commission for
additional images
prior to final
publication
May 28 – Use imagery and
illustrations to improve
approachability of plan. Images
with future plan draft once text
finalized.
“recreational center that attracts
hundreds of thousands annually.” (The
ME Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 3 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
region attracts millions (literally) of
visitors annually. We rent 600,000 hotel
rooms per year.)
Page 3:
First paragraph. “…Basics, Themes, Land
Use Map Implementation, Amendments +
Review, … “ I would take out the word
“and” after Implementation and make the
Amendments + Review consistent with
the table of contents.
CC Suggested alternate
wording. “The Plan is
organized into five
main sections: Basics,
Themes, Land Use Map,
Implementation, and
Amendments + Review.
Appendices provide
additional details.”
Edit made
Revise to read: “01 BASICS outlines the
organization of the plan, describes the
Planning Area and the Planning Period,
provides an overview of the public
outreach process, summarizes existing
conditions, and describes the relationship
of the Plan to other City planning
documents. Finally, the Plan describes the
basic planning principles employed in
developing the Plan. Recommendations
are discussed within the context of the
issues most important to Bozeman
citizens.”
HH Make Edit May 21st -Move forward
Revise to read: “02 THEMES set forth
community desired outcomes and the
Plan goals and objectives to achieve these
outcomes. The Themes include framework
maps that show key opportunity areas
related to each Theme.”
HH Make Edit May 21st -Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 4 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Revise to read: “05 AMENDMENTS +
REVIEW contains information concerning
amendment of the Plan, and the principles
involved in the City’s subdivision and
zoning review processes.”
HH Make Edit May 21st -Move forward
Page 4:
Simplify description of Appendix A to
single paragraphs like others
HH There is an entire
appendix describing the
outreach. Does the
detail here really
benefit the reader once
the plan is adopted?
Make Edit May 21st – Move forward - Drop
reference to details in A and cut to
single paragraph.
Appendix C details the history of the City
of Bozeman, along with highlights a
description of existing conditions. and the
direction it’s trending. Statistics and text
in this section are taken directly from the
2018 Demographic and Real Estate
Market Assessment prepared by Economic
and Planning Systems (EPS report).
Demographic information highlights the
existing population’s total count, income,
and age, as well as housing, employment,
and commercial and industrial statistics.
HH Make edit May 21st - Move forward
Page 5:
Planning Area, first sentence. Remove
comma after Bozeman’s Planning Area.
HH Edit Made
Planning Area, 2nd sentence. … two-mile
area around, but outside, the City..
HH Edit Made
First paragraph, last sentence. This is picky
but I would break up the last sentence by
CC Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 5 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
putting a period after “where City services
are available. Thoughtful development in
the Planning Area is guided…”
The use of hypens, en dash and em dashes
is somewhat inconsistent throughout the
document. E.g. “20 years- until 2040”
should be “20 years—until 2040.”
ME Edit made
Planning Time Horizon, 2nd sentence. The
future land use map and other elements
(i.e. plans for water, sewer,
transportation, and parks) look further
into the future to envision development
that are a long-term future that is not
predicted to occur over any particular
timeframe.
HH Edit made
Pubic Outreach, 1st sentence.
Developing Bozeman’s Community Plan
involved a lengthy public outreach period.
and the The Planning Board and City
Commission provided guidance
throughout the process.
HH Edit made
Public Outreach, 4th sentence
Events were advertised through print
media, and social media, as well as…
Edit made
Map should show other complimentary
planning areas (Belgrade, etc.) for context,
like the map on page 35
ME Could duplicate map on
page 35 here.
Increasing amount
shown on existing map
will either be too small
to read or will
restructure the page.
Purpose of map is
Discuss purpose of
the map and how to
set overall context for
the plan.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 6 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
different than page 35
map.
Under public outreach, (per Jerry’s
requests) can we indicate the
approximate number of participants at
each stage, if known?
ME This information will be
added to Appendix A
when the adoption
process is completed.
Could put in the
information to date.
June 4 – include data to date in
Appendix A with note for
additional information to be
added as process continues.
[Tom, maybe we could insert your
outreach table as an attachment
to the plan for now. I think we can
create a graphic in the base plan
that highlights involvement
numbers (more generalized than
the large table; and then the table
included in the appendices).
Page 6:
Employment, 2nd sentence
Gallatin County has experienced an
employment growth rate of over four
percent per year since 2010 - adding
12,000 jobs.
HH Edit made
Employment, last sentence. I don’t believe
you should ever start a sentence with a
number and if you need to you should
always spell it out. So, I would spell out
“Eighty percent…” This happens also in
the second column (under Housing)
second paragraph “Fifty- five percent of
renters in Bozeman…” Next paragraph:
“Forty-one percent of homes in Bozeman
are single-detached,…” And in the last
paragraph…”Seventy percent of Bozeman
commuters drive alone…”
CC Edits made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 7 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Housing, new 1st sentence.
“Figures in this section are from the 2019
Housing Need Study performed after the
EPS report was completed.”
Staff Edit made
Page 7:
Growth – last paragraph, move first
sentence to end so order of reference
matches order in document
HH Edit made
Comparison to Other Cities—I feel like we
should name these cities right up front
and state at least briefly that we feel
these are comparable to Bozeman in
some way and therefore were chosen. It
just sounds like we picked these cities out
of the air and we don’t even know what
cities we are talking about until we see
the chart on the next page. Or we could
just put a reference to the chart?
CC Revise 1st sentence to
read “As shown in the
table on Page 8,
compared to five other
communities around
the west …”
Edit made
Comparison to Other Cities
Consider consolidating language in these
paragraphs and remove language on
explanation of differences.
HH Related to several
other comments about
the comparison tables
Discussion to select
alternative is needed.
May 21st – Move forward with
options in the text
Table options A, B, C, D
A – No table or comparator
B – Table and comparator cities as
part of implementation
C – Replace table per ME see page
44 below
D – Revise text of current table
per ME suggestion below.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 8 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Since we have room on the page, should
we state our reasons for choosing these
particular communities thereby making
the comparisons more relevant?
Why did we pick these Cities? Right
metrics? Etc.?
CC See also ME comment
on page 8 related to
the same issue.
Discussion of purpose
and value of the
comparison should be
revisited. Clearly
identify the purpose
of the comparison
prior to insertion in
text or decide to
remove.
Discussion needed – Keep or
remove
May 28 –
Also, I thought we were going to number
the charts, graphs, figures, for easy
reference?
CC Edit made
I think the second sentence should be
broken into two sentences and the word
“more” added to the second sentence.
“Each of the communities employment
sectors were focused on education
services, health care, and social assistance
jobs. The main difference between the
Montana and Colorado communities was
that in Montana, a larger percentage of
jobs were in the retail field and in
Colorado there were more jobs under the
professional…”
CC Edit made
Also, in the second sentence of this
section “The percent of housing
developments with 10 or more units…) Is
it assumed that these are ATTACHED units
without us having to make that clear?
CC It is assumed but easy
to clarify.
Edit made
Page 8:
Benchmarking Tables: During discussion
on 12/3/19 we discussed a benchmarking
ME Reconsider inclusion of
comparator cities,
Discussion of purpose
and value of the
Discussion needed – Keep or
remove
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 9 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
table with data pertaining to affordability,
density, and growth. I suggest removing
Median age (not particularly pertinent to
a land use plan, in my opinion) and the
breakout of housing stock (this would be
more appropriate in our housing plan).
Please add Median Housing Price,
Population Density, and recent growth
rates. Compared with our peer cities, our
housing is expensive, our density is low,
and our growth rate is high.
what this comparison is
supposed to provide to
the reader in
understanding
Bozeman’s intended
future is not clear. Data
will be out of date
before it can be
published and there is
no mechanism to keep
current in the
document short of a
regular plan
amendment which is
time consuming for
questionable value.
comparison should be
revisited. Clearly
identify the purpose
of the comparison
prior to insertion in
text or decide to
remove.
Alternate sample table from ME to
potentially swap out. Options
presented above in single
location.
Page 9:
1st paragraph, sentence 4.
This Vision Statement focuses on balanced
growth, high quality planning and design,
strategic infrastructure choices, and
districts, and neighborhood centers.
HH Edit made
1st paragraph, sentence 6. The six Themes
in this Plan further the goals of the
Strategic Plan (see table at right below).
HH Edit made
New 2nd paragraph from 1st paragraph,
last sentence.
The Themes in this plan and have been
carried through from prior plans,
demonstrating a level of consistency in
community values over time.
HH Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 10 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
The Bozeman Strategic Plan is the
overarching policy statement for the City.
It was first adopted by the City
Commission on March 5, 2018 after a 24-
month process of community discussion
and evaluation. The Strategic Plan
provides direction for this Community
Plan primarily through its Vision
Statement #4 entitled A
Well-Planned City. This Vision Statement
focuses on five goals listed in the table
below. balanced growth, high quality
planning and design, strategic
infrastructure choices, districts, and
neighborhood centers. The Strategic Plan
also provides direction on related issues
through its Vision Statements entitled A
Sustainable Environment, An Innovative
Economy, and A High Performance
Organization. The six Themes in this Plan
further the goals of the Strategic Plan (see
table below). The Themes reflect
community priorities in and have been
carried through from prior plans,
demonstrating a level of consistency in
community values over time
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Revise Strategic Plan chart to move
column for Future Land Use Map to far
right position. Add dots in Economy
column and rows 4.2 and 4.3.
HH Make edit May 21st - Move forward
Page 10:
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 11 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Bullet 7, second sentence doesn’t seem to
add much…am I missing something? It
seems like this is pretty obvious and is
covered in the next bullet? I would delete
it.
CC Bullets 7 and 8 address
different subjects.
Bullet 7 addresses
design philosophy to
look beyond the
individual site and to
the well-being of the
city as a whole.
Bullet 8 is targeted to
issues of City resources.
Could break out 2nd
sentence of 7 as own
bullet and reword.
Discuss May 28 – not a critical issue and
not sure how relates to “City
resource” under bullet 8?
Bullet 7 – The City Bozeman intends to
create a resilient and sustainable
community by incorporating a holistic
approach to the design, construction, and
operation of buildings, neighborhoods,
and the City as a whole. Further,
Developments should be integrated into
their neighborhood and the larger
community.
HH Coordinate with prior
comment.
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Remove bullet 5 to remove duplication
with bullets 2 and 9.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Consider centering the block image on the
page
Staff Make edit Move forward
Revise pyramid to:
Under ZMA “Selection of one a zoning…”
Under Growth policy “Broad policy and
coarse geographic detail with dealing with
multiple zoning district to implement
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Commented [MM1]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted drfat
Commented [MM2]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted drfat
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 12 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Enlarge or otherwise emphasize the
caption.
Page 11:
City’s Role, 3rd sentence
The City provides the foundation of these
goals foundational work by providing
infrastructure, public services, and
implementing design standards to shape
the fabric of the community.
HH Edit made
It has also led to growing pains—higher
housing costs and increased traffic to
name two a few. The City’s response to
this is to pursue policies that mitigate
these growing pains. These policies are
described above and throughout this Plan.
HH Edit made
Second column under Housing
Affordability, fourth sentence. “The sale
price of homes have has more than fully
recovered from the 2008 recession for all
housing types.”
CC Edit made
Housing Affordability, 1st paragraph –
Housing affordability is a critical issue for
the community and has been an ongoing
concern since it was identified as an issue
in the 1972 community master plan. The
positive attributes that make Bozeman a
desirable place to live include job growth,
increased university enrollments, and
geographic location. These attributes have
also contributed to ever increasing
housing demand. The sale price of homes
have more than fully recovered for all
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 13 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
housing types. The median sale price of
homes, including single-households,
townhomes and condominiums, has
increased 75% since 2012. This is an
average increase of almost 10% per year.
Bozeman has taken the issue of housing
seriously. and It developed a the housing
needs assessment in 2019, hired a housing
coordinator, and released the Community
Housing Action Plan (CHAP) in October
2019. The CHAP was updated in April
2020. The CHAP Housing Action Plan
objectives include the following: i.)
ensuring community housing serves the
full range of incomes without losing sight
of safety net programs for extremely low
income and homeless families; ii.)
producing community housing at a rate
that exceeds or at least matches job
growth; and iii.) striving to produce
community housing at a rate that matches
the spectrum of community housing
needs. The CHAP Housing Plan identifies
19 priority action strategies to be
evaluated and, where appropriate, utilized
over the next five years in an effort to
accomplish the objectives. Because
affordable housing, including affordability,
is the subject of the detailed CHAP
Housing Action Plan, this Plan does not
address affordable housing affordability
issues in detail.
HH
Staff
Community Housing is
the term used
consistently in the
CHAP and therefore
should be properly
used in this document
as well.
Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 14 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Housing Affordability – suggest moving
paragraph from page 12 to 2nd paragraph
under Housing Affordability on page 11.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 12:
Second paragraph, second sentence. “This
figure includes housing for employees,
units needed…, provides housing choice,“
I don’t think this phrase fits here or makes
sense? and it is addressed in the last
paragraph anyway.
CC This description was
taken from the housing
plan.
Make edit to keep
housing choice
language but address
more direct
statement.
May 28 – Move forward: need
direct statement that additional
housing is needed in a variety of
types, size and costs. Or delete
and rely on last paragraph.
In the last paragraph (and in the entire
document) consider changing the word
“citizens” to “residents”. I had a
conversation with Buck Taylor of
Community Health Partners about this not
long ago that the use of the word citizen
leaves out many people in our community
that live here but don’t happen to be
citizens of this country. Just a
thought…you could do a search for the
word throughout the document and
change the ones where you really mean
residents and not necessarily citizens. I am
pretty sure that would be all of them.
CC Dictionary definitions:
Citizen – an inhabitant
of a city or town.
Resident – one who
resides in a place.
(Merriam-Webster)
Make edit Move forward – they mean the
same thing.
Page 13:
Introduction - Six Themes describe the
community-derived desired outcomes.
The Themes contain objectives and
actions to guide the City towards its
vision., Application of the Themes evolve
as the City grows, and allow the City to
incorporate new objectives as needed.
HH
Staff
Edit made
Commented [MM3]: This paragraph wasn’t identified,
but we’ve guessed that it’s in regard to the Housing
Assessment and moved that paragraph up.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 15 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Page 14:
Importance, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence:
I would suggest changing this “There is
strong public support for development
and maintenance of old and new
neighborhoods; these areas are
sometimes defined as “complete
communities”. I don’t think that sentence
makes sense nor does the first part of the
sentence relate to “complete
communities”. I would suggest taking out
the first sentence and just starting the
paragraph like this: “Neighborhoods or
communities that offer a mix of housing,
needed services, and opportunities within
close proximity of each other are
considered “complete communities”.
CC Proposed edit reads
more clearly and
maintains same
essential meaning.
Edit made
Importance, 2nd paragraph, 3rd sentence
“The idea is to They promote walking…”
HH Edit made
Page 16:
Add Theme number and name prior the
Goals, Objectives, and Actions. Ex. “Theme
1: Neighborhood Goals, Objectives and
Actions.” Repeat for each theme.
Staff
I am not sure why these goals and
objectives are tabbed over but if we have
room along the left edge of the page, I
would add some photos to depict what we
are talking about with the adjacent policy
statements. I have some pics that would
fit here if you would like for me to send
them to you? i.e., Humble Homes, Valley
CC Intent at this time is to
establish the text.
Appropriate photos can
be selected to support
the finalized text.
Anyone wishing to
provide photos can
No change at this
time. Will occur in
final draft after
Commission action.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 16 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
West showing trail connections in
neighborhood, ADUs, etc. But I am sure
you have some too. Is there a reason why
there are so few pictures? Maybe you are
going to add them later and this is just
about text?
send them to Tom or
Chris.
N-1.2 Review Consider increasing required
minimum densities in
residential districts.
HH Staff thinks Review is a
more active verb to
carry out an evaluation
rather than just think
about doing so.
Discuss No edit
N-1.10 enable Enable a gradual and
predictable increase in density in
developed areas over time.
ME June 3 – Move forward
“Goal N-2: Pursue simultaneous
emergence of commercial
nodes and residential development
through diverse mechanisms in
appropriate locations.”
Implementing objectives N-2.1 and N-2.2
say what is appropriate.
HH Staff agrees objectives
N-2.1 and N-2.2 give
guidance as to what is
appropriate. Keeping
the text is consistent
with the following edit
and setting the
expectation not
everywhere is
appropriate.
Withdrawn No edit
Goal N-2, phrased oddly and means
nothing to a lay-person.
RR Result of Board
discussion. Alternative
wording can be
considered.
Discuss
N-2.4 “Evaluate design standards.
Encourage development in appropriate
districts of buildings that are Buildings are
ME
HH
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Commented [MM4]: This is a bit of a weird phrase –
maybe mixed use buildings; or mixed use districts?
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 17 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
to be capable of serving an initial
residential purpose and be readily
converted to commercial uses…” Need to
be clear that this describes REMU, B-1,
etc. not residential areas
Consider adding an objective under Goal
N-2
N-2.5 Ensure that new development
includes opportunities for urban
agriculture, including rooftop and home
gardens, community gardens, and urban
farms, where appropriate.
CC JM Make edit Move forward
Page 17:
N-3.2 can we just say “Establish
standards…” Aren’t we all agreed we
need more diverse housing types?
CC The focus in the text is
on an area by area
evaluation. If the desire
is to revise the
objective to be
universally applicable a
text change is
appropriate. If the
intent is to force a
certain mix that
wording is different.
No Edit May 28 – language is acceptable
although being more direct maybe
preferred.
Goals 3.6 and 3.7 are passive, I believe we
should use stronger language. Rephrase
ex. "require" instead of "incentivize"
RR There are state law
limits on how much
cities can control
covenants. 76-2-302,
MCA
No edit
N-3.9 Support compact neighborhoods,
small lot sizes, and small floor plans,
ME Make edit June 3rd – Move Forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 18 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
especially through mechanisms such as
density bonuses.
N-4.1 is very vague, what are these civic
actions, how do you measure them to
show progress?
RR Civic action is action by
municipal government
or community NGOs.
No edit
N-4.2 I don’t think this is very clear as to
what someone would do to comply with
this policy statement…? Not really sure
how I would change this because I am not
positive what it is getting at. And…there
needs to be a comma after “structure”
CC It is open ended as the
nature of the outcome
is variable by location
and character of the
area. This may be a
directive more to the
City than to individuals.
Comma added May 28 – Add sense of place to
glossary .
Page 18:
Theme photo, do we have a better one? HH Check with DBA for
alternate images
Additional or alternate image with
future edits.
Page 19:
Can we add the Cannery District to this
map?
CC Cannery is an individual
development. The map
shows more broadly
identified areas. The
City can have as many
on the map as desired
and maintain
readability.
Discuss Hold until larger map discussion is
complete.
Areas of Activity Map: Missing: Cannery
District, Misco Mill District. Unclear:
what’s the Story Mill District (the defunct
Stockyard Café?)? What businesses
characterize the Fowler District or
Cottonwood District? Is the Midtown
District appropriately located? These
areas aren’t necessarily oval shaped.
ME See above. There is no
Misco Mill district, it is
an individual building.
There is a generic
reference to the NE
neighborhood but even
that doesn’t have
defined edges. Not all
Discuss June 3rd consider different graphic
approach. Better to remove colors
and just have names? Hold until
larger map discussion is complete.
Commented [MM5]: To be added into the Appendices
Commented [MM6]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted drfat
Commented [MM7]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted draft
Commented [MM8]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted draft
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 19 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
districts are focused on
businesses. No districts
are physical ovals but
there is no method to
define exact edges. The
ovals provide a
generalized location
without bogging down
on exact edges.
Page 20:
DCD-1.6 Consider replacing “Evaluate
parking requirements and methods of
providing parking…” with “Evaluate
parking management strategies such as
improved user information, pricing,
expanded pick-up and drop-off zones,
enhanced transit, bicycle and pedestrian
access, and other methods of reducing
parking as a part of the overall
transportation system and as a land use,
acknowledging that demand for parking
will still result in new supply being built.”
ME This was discussed
several times resulting
in the current text. Can
revisit again.
June 3 - withdrawn
Suggest moving Goal 1 and associated
objectives to the bottom of page 21.
Renumber as needed.
HH Does not change
meaning, puts
supporting urban
development within
the City first in order
Edit made
2.5, 2.6, and 2.10 could easily be
combined into 1 goal
RR Make edit Move forward - Show alternate
objective text combining the three
items.
DCD-2.10 Collaborate with the Montana
State University School of Architecture to
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 20 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
develop educational materials and
opportunities for local architects and
citizens on how to do quality urban design
for infill and greenfield sites.
Page 21:
“DCD-2.13 Pursue annexations consistent
with the future land use map and adopted
facility plans for development at urban
intensity.”
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
DCD-2.15 Pursue acquisition and
development of a diverse portfolio of
water sources and resources.
HH Staff believes the
original wording is
more precise and
accurate.
Make edit June 4 – Move forward
Goal DCD-3: Encourage growth
throughout the City, while increasing a
pattern of community development
oriented on centers of employment and
activity. Support a gradual increase in
intensity density within developed areas.
HH Density is a word
understood in many
different ways by
different people. Staff
considers “intensity” as
descriptive to the
meaning of a greater
amount of
development units per
area unit but subject to
fewer interpretations.
Make Edit May 21st – Move forward and
change to : “Support a gradual
increase in development intensity
within developed areas.”
Keep the rest of the goal as is in
the current Plan draft.
3.1 - What other goals are we talking
about?
RR
HH
Board’s expressed
intent are those listed
in DCD-3.
Growth
throughout rather than
in just one area
Increase center
oriented development
Make edit May 21st – Move forward with
Alternate wording for DCD-3.1
“Coordinate infrastructure
development, land use
development, and other City
actions and priorities through
community planning.”
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 21 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Gradual
increase in intensity in
developed areas
The word “with” in the
sentence could be
replaced with
“through”.
DCD-3.2 Support higher density
development along main corridors and at
high visibility street corners to
accommodate population growth and
support businesses.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
3.2 and 3.3 are speaking to the same
issue
RR They speak to different
means of advancing the
issue. 3.2 is incentive
oriented and 3.3
addresses compulsory
standards
Discuss
DCD-3.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum
building height limits in multi-household,
commercial, industrial, and mixed-use
zoning districts to account for revised
building methods, building code changes,
and the effect of incremental height
changes on meeting goals of this Plan.
HH
Staff
Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
DCD-3.6 Evaluate and pursue coordinated
improvements and facilities to mitigate
development impacts for multiple
developments rather than requiring each
site to be fully self-supported.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 22 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Evaluate and pursue joint mitigation of
development impacts across multiple
developments.
DCD-3.7 Encourage convergence of public
transit routes and the placement of higher
density housing developments along
public transit routes.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward with
alternate text “Encourage the
location of higher density housing
and public transit routes in
proximity to one another.”
Page 22:
Introduction – 2nd paragraph, 2nd
sentence. “Responding to climate change,
and invasive plants and animals,
protecting the health of our water
systems and our air quality, and grappling
with the impacts of increased human
population, are some of our challenges.
HH Make Edit done
2nd paragraph 2nd sentence – move
reference to invasive plants and animals
to last in sentence.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 23:
Many of the trails shown on this map are
inaccurate. Trails shown should extend
beyond city boundaries.
ME Trails are from City GIS
data. Due to limitation
on readability the map
does not attempt to
depict all trails. The
direction to the online
map is given as the
data is constantly being
updated. Can update
with final draft to catch
up with recent
changes.
No edit at this time. June 3rd - Fresh pull on trail data
for map. Check categories to make
certain all relevant included. Do
this as part of the overall map
updates after Board discussion. Commented [MM9]: Graphics changes to be made in
next submitted, formatted draft
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 23 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Page 24:
Consider bolding “complete streets” and
other terms that appear in the glossary of
terms so that people know that they can
look these items up in the glossary. Where
is the glossary?
CC Appendix F is the
glossary. See
Resolution 4244 for
Complete Streets
policy.
Make Edit May 28 – not discussed. Added
Resolution link.
Move existing goal EPO-1 to follow
existing EPO-2.
HH Edit made
EPO-1.1 Activate our connections to
waterways by creating locations and
amenities encouraging points of
engagement bringing people to access
them water’s edge.
HH Make Edit May 21st – Move forward
Consider adding “urban farms” to EPO-1.3
EPO-1.3 Inclusion of community gardens
and urban farms as part of open spaces
outside of watercourses and wetlands in
subdivisions is encouraged where
appropriate there are good soils.
CC JM
HH
See comment memo
from CC and JM
Make Edit to last line
Discuss balance
May 21st – added edit in last line
CC&JM May 28. See revised memo
for suggested language.
EPO-1.3 - I like the inclusion of community
gardens but it has nothing to do with
natural features being discussed. Include
in a better location
RR Make Edit Move to EPO-3
EPO-2.1 Coordinate the location of
existing new and future parks to create
opportunities for larger and more
functional parks. Prioritize quality
locations and features in parks over
quantity of parks.
HH Staff recommends
keeping the existing
language. Current
language addresses
parks established with
new subdivisions and
those which are yet to
be created.
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Commented [MH10]: Unsure on direction here?
Commented [MM11]: Added edit included in first
column; What is the revised memo language?
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 24 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Reverse order of EPO-2.3 and 2.4 HH
EPO-2.5 Work with partner organizations
to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk,
environmentally sensitive areas that
contribute to water quality, wildlife
corridors, and or wildlife habitat.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
EPO section 3 should include a GOA
addressing refuse and recycling.
RR Discuss
EPO-3.1 Ensure complete streets and
identify long-term resources for the
maintenance of year-round bike and
multiuse paths’ maintenance to improve
utilization and reduce annual per capita
vehicle miles traveled.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward with
revised text “EPO-3.1 Ensure
complete streets and identify
long-term resources for the
maintenance of year-round bike
and multiuse paths’ maintenance
to improve utilization and reduce
annual per capita vehicle miles
traveled.”
Move EPO-3.2 to be the first objective
under goal EOP-3
HH Edit made
Page 25:
3.6 - Should specifically mention
infiltration in place, LID features, green
streets, etc. so that it is clear they should
be included in code.
RR These options are
already included in
Chapter 38 and 40 of
the municipal code and
the Engineering Design
Standards
No edit at this time
EPO-3.8 In coordination with the
Sustainability Division, provide
public education on energy conservation,
and diversified power generation
alternatives.
HH Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 25 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
EPO-3.9 Integrate climate change
considerations into development
standards.
HH Edit made
Goal EPO-4: Promote uses of the natural
environment that maintain and improve
habitat, water resources quantity, and
water quality, while giving due
consideration to the impact of City these
regulations on economic viability.
HH Staff considers
“resources” as less
specific and prefers the
existing text. The
removal of “these”
substantially opens the
meaning of the
consideration of
regulations beyond
those under the City’s
authority or related to
the natural
environment.
Make edit May 21st – Move forward “Goal
EPO-4: Promote uses of the
natural environment that maintain
and improve habitat, water
quantity, and water quality, while
giving due consideration to the
impact of City these regulations
on economic viability.”
EPO-4.5 Identify, prioritize, and preserve
key wildlife habitat and connectivity
corridors.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
EPO-4.5 would be more appropriate in
EPO-1
RR Make edit Move objective to EPO-1
Page 26:
Our City fosters the close proximity of
housing, services, and jobs, and desires to
provides safe, efficient mobility for
pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and
drivers.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Last paragraph, second sentence consider
replacing “citizens” with “residents” but
again, I am not going to point out each
incident…I would suggest doing a word
search.
CC Match with outcome of
discussion on same
topic identified above.
Make edit Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 26 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Last paragraph, Third sentence:
Appropriately designed trails, sidewalks,
crossings, and bike lanes, and transit
networks help us move around…”
CC Edit made
Photo. How ‘bout a better photo than a
street without bike lanes, sidewalks, or
transit service
ME Final photos will be set
after Commission
action. Anyone wishing
to provide photos can
send them to Tom or
Chris.
No change at this
time. Will occur in
final draft after
Commission action.
Page 27:
Accessibility and Mobility Map. The
indicated “bicycle facilities” do not reflect
current conditions.
ME Can update with final
draft to catch up with
recent changes.
No change at this
time. Map update to
occur in final draft.
June 2
Map should include transit corridors. ME See page 4 of ME
comment for map
samples suggested
Discuss how many
maps for each
category are needed.
June 2
Page 28:
M-1.1 Prioritize mixed-use land use
patterns. Encourage and enable the
development of housing, jobs, and
services in close proximity to one another.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
M 1.3 - I think mode share is a better
measure of multimodal travel
RR This objective
addresses what the
design and
performance should be
for the physical
infrastructure. Mode
share addresses a
different subject.
Discuss
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 27 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
M-1.4 Develop safe, connected, and
complementary transportation networks
for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other
personal mobility devices (bicycles, e-
bikes, electric scooters, powered
wheelchairs, etc.).
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward with
alternate language “M-1.4
Develop safe, connected, and
complementary transportation
networks for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and users of other
personal mobility devices
(bicycles, e-bikes, electric
scooters, powered wheelchairs,
etc.).”
M 1.6 - I believe putting much effort into
AV's right now is premature and an
ineffective use of staff time. I can
elaborate on the issues if needed but
simply put the technology can't function
in this area on the majority of roads due
to issues such as unpaved roads, no lane
markings, lack of sensors, and insufficient
network capacity.
RR Autonomous vehicles
are one component of
the objective. Time
commitment should be
commensurate with
each element of the
objectives.
No edit at this time
M-1.7 Is “trunk network” in the glossary?
If so, can we bold it? “connecting high-
frequency” high-frequency what? Transit?
CC
HH
ME
Wording needs revision
for clarity
Make edit May 21st – Need clarity edit -
“Develop a trunk network of high
frequency priority transit service
connecting major commercial
nodes and coinciding with
increased density.”
Page 29:
M 1.12 - Should include consideration for
parking maximums and no parking
requirements as opposed to just changing
minimums.
RR Parking maximums are
already in the zoning
code.
No edit at this time
Can we consider adding an
objective/action item either here or in the
CC The program already
exists and is outside of
No edit at this time
Commented [MH12]: This language was already added in
the previous version
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 28 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
neighborhoods section regarding the
City’s Traffic Calming Project? Partnering
with Public Works and neighborhoods to
determine where traffic calming pilot
projects are needed to determine if they
would improve safety?
the land use arena and
into street operations.
Board has previously
kept focus on land use
specific issues where
possible.
M-2.1
Work with the Public Works Department,
Police Department, and other partners to
provide education on safe travel behaviors
and rules.
HH Edit made
2.5 and 1.4 say/do the same thing.
Consider combining
RR Discuss
Page 30:
Theme 5 –
Our City benefits from and desires to
further an expanding economy that is
powered by the talents of its citizens, a
dedicated and engaged business
community, and strong regional
partnerships.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Revise the Importance paragraphs. See
page 44 of this document for text.
HH Make edit Move forward
Comment: When I look at the chart on
page 8 I notice that a major part of our
economy is also “Accommodation and
Food Service as well as Retail” These are
relatively low-paying jobs and people have
a hard time living here on those wages
given our cost of living. I am not sure
where this fits in this Theme but this is an
important issue in our community. This
CC Make edit Move forward with edit as part of
larger update to importance
section on page 44 of this
document.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 29 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Importance section makes it seem like we
have a bunch of high-paying jobs and
everyone is participating in this great
“dynamism, diversity, and wealth”. I think
that is a bit skewed. But maybe this isn’t
the place?
Small edit: last paragraph, second to the
last sentence, I don’t think outdoor
recreations should have an “s”.
CC Edit made
Page 31:
Retitle map HH Discuss May 21st – Consider removing map
as part of larger discussion on
maps. Or replace with more
descriptive map like non-res
zones.
Page 32:
EE-1.2 Invest in those infrastructure
projects identified in the capital
improvement plan that will strengthen
business and higher education
communities as coordinated through the
annual capital improvement plan.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
EE-2.3 Adopt zoning regulations that
establish urban farms, including vertical
farms, as a conditional [or permitted] use
in appropriate locations. Urban farms are
compatible with the [insert names (e.g.,
Commercial, Industrial)] land use
designations shown on the Future Land
Use Map.
Other possible objectives to consider:
CC JM Existing standards
require open spaces for
residential uses. These
can be met in many
ways including roof
decks, balconies,
shared built spaces,
and private and shared
open areas. Need to be
clear if this is a new
Discuss May 28 – Rely on memo to
describe intent and proposed
language. Revised memo prior to
June 16th PB meeting. Commented [MM13]: Not sure of requested change?
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 30 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
• Amend [zoning and/or subdivision
codes] to encourage [or require] all new
housing units [or multifamily housing
units] to contain designated yard, rooftop,
or other shared space for residents to
garden.
• Amend [zoning and/or building codes] to
encourage [or require] all [or some, such
as multifamily residential, commercial,
institutional, or public] new construction
to incorporate green roofs and edible
landscaping, vertical gardens, and
encourage the use of existing roof space
for community gardening.
addition or just
clarifying use of what is
already provided.
Use of private land (or
roofs) for gardening by
the owners and
residents is already
permitted in all
districts.
The City cannot modify
state adopted building
codes.
Page 33:
Why is this on a separate page? CC If page 33 is needed for
layout purposes
additional images can
be placed.
Edit made
Page 34:
Revise Theme 6 HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward with
alternate text “Our City, in
partnership with Gallatin County,
Montana State University, and
other regional authorities, desires
to addresses the needs of a
rapidly growing and changing
regional population through
strategic infrastructure choices
and thoughtful coordinated
decision-making.”
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 31 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Third sentence under Importance—
"Conflicting decisions and lack of trust
between agencies can create
complications and uncertainty, adversely
affect our overall public health and safety,
and drive up costs.
CC Edit made
Revise Importance section for Theme 6 –
see page 45 of this document for text
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 35:
Would it be possible to add the Triangle
Plan boundaries on this map?
CC Yes, however that is
not yet adopted by all
parties. Likely will be
adopted before GP is
complete. Suggest
waiting to edit map.
May also make map
harder to read.
Discuss
Change shading so Bozeman planning area
is dark in all areas including overlap with
Belgrade
Staff Correct prior to next
public draft with maps
Move forward
Page 36:
Goal RC-1: Improve communication, and
coordination with Gallatin County, the City
of Belgrade, and other regional public
entities regarding community planning
and associated matters. (Remove comma
after communication)
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
RC-1.4 Participate in regularly scheduled
coordination meetings with Gallatin
County and the City of Belgrade planning
departments and planning boards to
coordinate planning issues.
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Commented [MM14]: Graphics change
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 32 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
RC-1.5 Implement the Triangle
Community Policy Plan in coordination
between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Gallatin
County.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
RC-1.6 Prepare for establishment of a
Metropolitan Planning Organization,
anticipated to be required by federal law
after the completion of the 2020 US
Census.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Goal RC-2: Continue and build on
successful collaboration with Gallatin
County, neighboring municipalities, and
other agencies to identify and mitigate
potential hazards and develop
coordinated response plans Plans.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
RC-2.4 Encourage review of land use
regulations and standards that affect the
wildland urban interface (WUI) to provide
adequate public safety measures, mitigate
impacts on public health, and encourage
fiscal responsibility.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
RC-2.5 Through coordination with non-
profit and agency partners, identify and
prioritize key areas lands for acquisition or
placement of conservation easements to
lessen with the goal of lessening or
eliminating development in
environmentally sensitive areas and/or
preservinge areas consistent with the
other priorities of this growth policy.
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Reorder and renumber objectives under
Goal RC-3 in the following order using
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 33 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
current numbering: RC-3.8, RC-3.4, RC-3.3,
RC-3.7, RC-3.1, RC-3.2, RC-3.6, RC-3.5
Page 37:
RC-3.7 Encourage annexation of land
adjacent to the city prior to development
and encourage annexation of wholly
surrounded areas.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
RC-3.9 Can we include schools in this list?
They appear in the Triangle Plan.
CC Since RC-3 is specific to
Gallatin County suggest
any addition happen in
RC-1. Since RC-1.5 is
included the school
coordination is pulled
in.
Make edit Move forward – add “public
schools” to list of entities in RC-1.
RC-4.3 Is this supposed to be a stand-
alone policy and not connected to the
next sentence? If so, I would suggest that
we make the next sentence its own
policy…
CC Yes, this should be its
own objective.
Edit made
RC 4.4 “Update the Unified Development
Code (UDC) to:” Or, if not, then add
something that is related to human well-
being and health to the bulleted points?
Does that make sense?
CC Yes, match with prior
comment
Edit made
Page 38:
Add new Theme 7 Resiliency, see page 47
of this document for text
Staff Make edit Move forward
Page 39:
1st paragraph, second sentence – Strike
“designed”
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
1st paragraph, 3rd sentence – Strike “also” HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 40:
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 34 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
First line, “… seat of a bike, or a car, a bus,
…”
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Last paragraph – “The land use map sets
generalized expectations for what goes
where in the community. Each category
has its own descriptions. Understanding
the future land use map is not possible
without also reading the category
descriptions. Each category description
can be implemented by multiple zoning
districts. The land use categories and
subsequent descriptions provide a guide
for appropriate development and
redevelopment locations for civic,
residential, commercial, industrial, and
other uses, and others. The Future Lland
Uuse designations are important because
they aim to further the vision and goals of
the City through promoting sustainability,
citizen and visitor safety, and a high
quality of life that will shape Bozeman’s
future development.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 41:
Change title to – FUTURE LAND USE MAP
– LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
1st Paragraph, sentences 6 and 7.
“If one or more intergovernmental
agreements (IGAs) are developed that
address areas outside City limits,
development would need to meet the
terms of these all relevant agreements.
While the l Land use categories are not
HH
Staff
Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 35 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
regulatory.., each description also
identifies appropriate zoning categories
that implement the intent. The
Correlation with Zoning table shows the
existing zoning districts that implement
the intent of each district.
Urban Neighborhood description:
"Higher density residential areas are
encouraged, but not required,
…..."
If this is truly important we should
require it.
RR A requirement leads to
several questions that
need to be answered.
1) what does “higher”
density mean in this
context.
2) how close is
proximity
Discuss May 29 – State clear objective.
Active language.
2nd paragraph, last sentence –
“Building height or other methods of
transitions may be required for
compatibility with adjacent
development.”
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 43:
1st Paragraph, sentences 5 and 6 - Urban
streetscapes, plazas, outdoor seating,
public art, and
hardscaped open space and park
amenities are anticipated. This will
appropriately design for urban character.
The urban character expected in this
designation includes urban streetscapes,
plazas, outdoor seating, public art, and
hardscaped open space and park
amenities.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Commented [MM15]: Not sure what the change is here.
Do we just delete “but are required”
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 36 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Last paragraph, move 2nd sentence to end
and reword to “Densities of nearby
residential homes needed to support this
scale are with an average of 14-22
dwellings per net acre.”
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 44:
Under 5. Regional Commercial and
Services—fourth sentence, add “to”.
Development within this category…
pedestrian activity and provide ready-
access within and adjacent to
development.
CC Edit made
Swap out Costco photo for Kenyon-Noble
on Oak Street or 1001 Oak Street office
buildings.
Staff Shows broader range of
uses in the images and
more representative of
desired site designs
Change photos before
next pubic draft with
images.
Move forward – staff will send
photos
Page 45:
Pictures under Industrial. Do we have any
other examples that are not in the NE
Neighborhood?
CC Alternate photos can
be taken. Due to
change in land use map
photos are no longer
applicable
Change photos before
next public draft with
images.
Use placeholders for now. We
likely won’t have time to find
better photos for now.
6. Industrial. The Northeast
Neighborhood—where all of these photos
are taken—is now designated Community
Commercial. We need some photos of
actual industrial use (e.g. photonics,
Kenyon Noble’s yards, etc.).
ME See previous comment. See previous
comment
See previous comment
Page 46:
Correlation with Zoning “Applicable
zoning categories…” The “A” is missing.
CC Edit made
Commented [MM16]: graphics
Formatted: Font color: Auto
Commented [MM17]: graphics
Commented [MM18]: graphics
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 37 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Also, is there a way for us to at least have
a chart with the zoning categories
abbreviations spelled out with perhaps a
brief explanation of them? Or at least
where to find them?
CC HH We will add a link to
the online municipal
code that includes all
the district names and
descriptions
Edit made
Also, why is R-S on this chart if it doesn’t
correspond to anything? Sorry if that is a
stupid question!
CC RS is still an existing
district but has been
barred from use as
future amendments to
the zoning map.
“commemorate and
preserve existing RS
zoning only.” If it were
to be shown it is
primarily in the Urban
Neighborhood
designation.
Discuss
Page 49:
See proposed revisions to the Importance
paragraphs. See page 50 of this document
for text.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 50:
See proposed revisions to the Monitoring
and Updates introduction paragraphs. See
page 50 of this document for text.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Short Term Action List, 2nd sentence
Many actions are ongoing activities.
HH Edit made
Consider putting the short-term action list
in order by Theme and state that they are
not listed in any order of priority.
CC Make edit Move forward
Revise short term action list so all
objectives and goals are referred to in the
Staff Edit to be made after
remainder of edits to
Commented [MH19]: Ordered by theme where
applicable. When action contained multiple themes, it was
placed at the end.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 38 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
same way. Some are in parenthesis at the
end of sentence and other are not.
Update all references for other edits
reflect final
reordering from other
edits.
Page 51:
A City of Neighborhoods - Housing stock
diversity: How are we measuring
diversity?
RR Measure may depend
on purpose and
housing type. Intent
has been to finalize
methods and details
after City Commission
has accepted the
metric.
Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
Consider adding “Pedestrian-oriented
street intersections per square mile” to
the notes section of Intersection Density
as a way to explain this metric (you can
also keep what is already there about
trails).
CC Prior Board discussion
directed the shorter
listing in the plan with
more expansion
descriptions as the
items are developed
and measured.
Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
Under Commute Mode Share…what are
we measuring here? What do we want to
increase? Walking, biking, transit
commute trips? SOV commute trips?
CC Prior discussion
directed the shorter
listing in the plan with
more expansion
descriptions as the
items are developed
and measured.
Previous discussion was
on documenting non-
Single Occupant
Vehicle trips.
Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
A City Bolstered by Downtown and
Complementary Districts - Development
RR Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 39 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
vs Redevelopment: Target is to increase
redevelopment but I'm not sure that is the
right measure. If redevelopment equates
to removing smaller more affordable
housing and replacing with larger less
affordable housing then this target makes
other issues worse and is a failure. How
are we reinsuring that redevelopment is
equating to increased density or
affordability?
A City Bolstered by Downtown and
Complementary Districts - Greenhouse
Gas Emissions: Target is to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, how do we
expect to measure that?
RR This measurement is by
the Sustainability
Division as part of the
Climate Action Plan
No action at this time
A City Bolstered by Downtown and
Complementary Districts - Vehicle Miles
Traveled: Target is to reduce VMT which is
an unattainable and unrealistic goal. We
can't continue to grow outward and
reduce how far we travel.
RR Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
Page 52:
A City that Prioritizes Accessibility and
Mobility Choices - Transit Accessibility:
Target is to increase % of jobs within a
distance of a route. This is outside our
control, Streamline’s survey response
could be that residents want less routes
and increased frequency and with that
change we have instantly failed.
RR Discuss Metrics discussion – no action at
this time
Under Acres Wholly Surrounded but
Unannexed…why did we use the term
CC Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 40 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
“reduce” as opposed to “decrease” like all
the others?
Page 54:
See proposed revisions to the Amendment
Process introduction paragraphs. See
page 52 of this document for text.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
The following events require a formal
review of the plan:
1. Passage of five years since adoption of
the Plan by the City Commission.
Five years after the plan is adopted it must
be reviewed.
HH Edit made
Review Triggers, 1st paragraph.
4. Does the Plan meet the current needs
of the community?
5. Can this Plan be modified to better
serve the needs and desires of the
community?
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Column 1, last sentence.
The annual review of those indicators may
inspire interest in suggest conducting a
review prior to the required five year
period.
HH Edit made
Review Triggers, 2nd column, last two
sentences.
When updated, the review Any review of
the growth policy should consider the
triggers presented below. Periodic formal
and informal reviews of the
implementation policies as well as the
growth policies themselves are desirable.
HH Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 41 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
See proposed revisions to the Amendment
Process paragraphs in attached sheets.
See page 52 of this document for text.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
Page 55:
See proposed revisions to the Amendment
Criteria introduction paragraphs. See
page 52 of this document for text.
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
1st column, Move Who May Initiate
Amendments up one paragraph before
the last paragraph of Amendment Process
HH Make edit May 21st – Move forward
1st column, 2nd paragraph.
Any proposed changes to either the text
or maps contained in the Bozeman
Community this Plan must comply with all
of the defined criteria shown described
below. The burden of proof for the
desirability of a proposed amendment and
its compliance with the criteria lies with
the applicant. Unless all criteria are
successfully met by demonstrable facts,
an amendment may not be approved.
HH Edit made
See proposed revisions to the Amendment
Criteria paragraphs in attached sheets.
HH Edit made
Page 56:
Under Agriculture. I would still like to see
some way that we can grow food (small,
sustainable, urban ag) in the city limits.
Just had to say this one more time! 😊
CC This discussion is
specific to application
of the term to the
subdivision review
process. Subdivisions
create lots for a wide
range of future uses as
allowed by zoning.
Discuss
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 42 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Agriculture as a
business is allowed in
two districts at this
time.
Page 57:
Under Agricultural Water User Facilities,
number 1. Third sentence there should be
a comma after the word “demonstrated”
before the word “provision”
CC Edit made
Insert reference to MCA ditch
maintenance provisions to read:
“4. Agricultural Water User Facilities are
subject to Section 70-17-112, and Section
85-7-2211 and 85-7-2212, MCA.”
Staff State law references
address duties and
liabilities re ditches and
interference with
easements.
Make edit Move forward
Under Local Services there is a missing
period after the third bullet.
CC Edit made
Page 58:
Under Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat,
number 1. Last sentence…do we use the
term “Present Rural” anymore?
CC That term has been
replaced with “No City
Services”.
Edit made
Page 61:
Under second column, When Does the
City Initiate Zoning Changes…”, second
bullet should start “Forty percent...”
CC Edit made
Page 63:
First column under number 2 (a)
“Reasonable provision of adequate light
and air”, add “d” in and.
CC Edit made
Page 65:
First column under “d”. 4th sentence
“Parks and Open Lands” the “o” should be
capitalized.
CC Edit made
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 43 of 57
Edit Origin Staff comment Action Taken/Needed Date discussed & Outcome
Page 66:
First column, second sentence. “When
evaluating compliance with criteria,” add
comma after criteria.
CC Edit made
Page 67:
First column under number 1. “The public
hearing are is advertised as…”
CC Edit made
Page 1:
The city of Bozeman is set in an expansive valley, surrounded by mountain ranges and intersected by blue ribbon waterways. Over the last 150
years, Bozeman has grown from a small town supported by agriculture to one of the most livable micropolitan areas in United States. Desirable
attributes such as immediate access to year-round recreation, high-quality schools, a growing high-tech culture, and thoughtful and forward-
thinking city policies have all contributed to strong population growth, high employment and rapid development.
Bozeman now has a population of approximately 50,000 people, which is up from 22,660 people in the year 1990. It is the fourth largest city in
Montana. Bozeman is home to Montana State University, the largest university in the State with a total enrollment of nearly 17,000 students.
Montana State University is one of only 130 universities out of 4,338 institutions to be designated a very high research activity school. Bozeman
is a growing regional healthcare hub, serves as the major trading center for much of western Montana, has a sophisticated and growing high-
tech industry, and is a renowned summer and winter recreational center that attracts many thousands of visitors annually.
Bozeman's high rate of growth and changing economics, the rapid development in surrounding Gallatin County, and state law mandating that
community plans be kept up-to-date, all make it necessary for Bozeman to adopt a new community plan. Without guided growth and
development, the community’s identity and overall quality of life could be diminished by congestion and pollution. The City has had five
community plans dating back to 1958, the most recent being its 2009 plan. Each plan builds upon the others, reflecting the community’s vision
and needs over time.
This community plan (the Plan) is a fundamental policy document guiding further growth and community development in Bozeman. It sets forth
Bozeman's future growth policy for land-use and development. The purpose of the Plan is to guide the City’s community planning and to
evaluate and prioritize the City’s actions moving forward. It reflects the community’s shared values and priorities. The Plan is the City’s long-
range growth policy that meets the statutory requirements of Section 76-1-601 of the Montana Code Annotated.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 44 of 57
This Plan helps guide citizens, City staff, and elected officials’ decisions. It brings land use policy into larger community discussions on many
issues addressed by the City. It's measure of success is continuation of the Bozeman tradition— a flourishing, safe, and a vibrant place to reside,
build a business, and raise a family.
The City, as an institution, will undertake many actions to implement the Plan as well as track the progress of the Plan’s implementation through
established indicators. These indicators will help determine the objectives that are working, where they can be improved, and the objectives
that need to be reevaluated. The citizens and businesses in the City, through their aspirations and hard work, will carry out the Plan.
Page 7
Comparison City chart alternative (Egge)
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 45 of 57
Page 30
IMPORTANCE
Bozeman’s economy is diverse and expanding, with a mix of businesses and industries centered on technology, healthcare, education,
recreation, and tourism, and regional services. This is one of the City’s great strengths. The City also has many lower wage jobs in service roles.
Bozeman has access to cutting edge education and research at opportunities from Montana State University. With an enrollment of nearly
17,000 students, the University hosts ten colleges that includes subjects such as Engineering, Agriculture, Business, and Nursing. Graduates have
created offshoot industries that foster competencies in several national industries, including businesses in opto-electronics, biofilm, and outdoor
gear and other industries. Continued investment in job training and education is needed to support continued economic growth.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 46 of 57
The City’s commitment to broadband availability through its Economic Development Division has improved availability of national-level
broadband speeds in key areas of the City, making state of the art communications and information from distant consultants available locally.
Immediate and short-distance proximity to outdoor recreation opportunities provides significant daily mental and physical health benefits to
residents and employers, making Bozeman one of the most desirable innovation centers in the country.
Bozeman’s growing economy makes possible its increasing dynamism, diversity, and wealth. Each of the major sectors of our economy –
education, technology, outdoor recreations, tourism, health care, and regional services – benefits from and reinforces the others. The growing
economy provides resources the money that enables the City to pursue its priorities.
Page 34 – Theme 6
IMPORTANCE
Cooperation between agencies makes sense. The jurisdictional lines between city and county, state land and local land, are important in helping
define the roles of various public agencies. Conflicting decisions and lack of trust between agencies can create complications, uncertainty,
adversely affect our overall public health and safety, and drive up costs. A good working relationship between city and county officials and staff
can reduce conflicts, improve our overall infrastructure, lower taxpayer costs and ultimately create a safer, healthier community. Regional
coordination creates and maintains a coherent land use pattern that supports the needs of existing and future citizens and the desire to protect
community character and amenities. Cooperation between jurisdictions supports development patterns that do not compromise the ability of
municipalities to grow in the future or expand necessary infrastructure. The jurisdictional lines between city and county, state land, and local
land, are important in defining the responsibilities and roles of various public agencies.
Belgrade, Bozeman, and Gallatin County have mutually agreed they will coordinate land use in the area of overlapping jurisdictions known as the
T triangle pursuant to the Triangle Community Plan to achieve:
• Compact, contiguous development and infill to achieve an efficient use of land and infrastructure, reducing sprawl and preserving open space,
agricultural lands, wildlife habitat, and water resources;
• Well-planned transportation systems, consistent with the overall growth management vision, support the development of multi-modal and
public transportation networks;
• Community cores that have adequate transportation, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities. Residential areas that provide
healthy surroundings; and
• Opportunities for agriculture, industry, and business, while minimizing conflict between adjacent land uses.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 47 of 57
Bozeman commits to Gallatin County and City of Belgrade to work together in pursuit of these goals. utilizing t The Planning Coordinating
Committee will play a key role in coordinating this work. and other appropriate means.
Page 38 – New insertion
Theme 7: Resiliency
Our City desires to be forward thinking, collaborative, and deliberate in planning and execution of plans and policies to enable
our community to successfully ride the waves of change.
Importance
Communities and the world around them are constantly changing. Resilient communities rebound, positively adapt to, or thrive amidst changing
conditions or challenges and maintain quality of life, healthy growth, durable systems and conservation of resources for present and future
generations. Resiliency addresses both short-term or one-time shocks as well as long-term stressors.
Resiliency is needed to address a wide range of circumstances affecting all elements of the community and its operations. Stressors include
natural disasters, climate change, economic shocks and transitions, and in 2020, a pandemic. Long term systems and adaptations, not just initial
responses, are needed to maintain a healthy community. Resiliency takes a holistic approach towards protecting and improving a community.
Bozeman is well positioned with diverse subject plans to address many of the likely areas where stressors occur. The staff and elected officials
work to coordinate between plans and actions. The process of coordination is integrated with the constant process of updating plans, capital
improvement programs, budgets, and ordinances.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 48 of 57
Goal R-1: Continue to strengthen and develop resilience as a community.
R-1.1 Be reflective: use past experience to inform future decisions
R-1.2 Be resourceful: recognize alternative ways to use resources
R-1.3 Be inclusive: prioritize broad consultation to create a sense of shared ownership in decision making
R-1.4 Be integrated: bring together a range of distinct systems and institutions
R-1.5 Be robust: well-conceived, constructed, and managed systems
R-1.6 Be redundant: spare capacity purposively created to accommodate disruption
R-1.7 Be flexible: willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to changing circumstances
Goal R-2: Pursue community decisions in a manner that supports resilience.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 49 of 57
R-2.1 Co-Benefits: Provide solutions that address problems across multiple sectors creating maximum benefit
R-2.2 High Risk and Vulnerability: Ensure that strategies directly address the reduction of risk to human well-being, physical
infrastructure, and natural systems
R-2.3 Economic Benefit-Cost: Make good financial investments that have the potential for economic benefit to the investor and the
broader community both through direct and indirect returns
R-2.4 Social Equity: Provide solutions that are inclusive with consideration to populations that are often most fragile and vulnerable to
sudden impacts due to their continual state of stress
R-2.5 Technical Soundness: Identify solutions that reflect best practices that have been tested and proven to work in similar regional
context
R-2.6 Innovation: Advance new approaches and techniques that will encourage continual improvement and advancement of best
practices serving as models.
R-2.7 Adaptive Capacity: Include flexible and adaptable measures that consider future unknowns of changing climate, economic, and
social conditions
R-2.8 Harmonize with Existing Activity: Expand, enhance, or leverage work being done to build on existing efforts
R-2.9 Long-Term and Lasting Impact: Create long-term gains to the community with solutions that are replicable and sustainable,
creating benefit for present and future generations
Related Plans
Integrated Water Resources Plan – 2013
Integrated Water Resources Implementation Plan – 2013
Climate Vulnerability Assessment/Resiliency Strategy - 2019
Community Climate Action Plan – 2011 (in process of being updated)
Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation Plan and Community Wildfire Protection Plan (draft) – 2019
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 50 of 57
Drought Management Plan – 2017
Fire and EMS Master Plan – 2017
Affordable Housing Action Plan - 2019
Stormwater Management Plan – 2019
Transportation Master Plan – 2017
Community Transportation Safety Plan – 2013
Water Facility Plan Update – 2017
Economic Development Strategy Update – 2016
Urban Forestry Management Plan – 2016
Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update – 2015
Not for inclusion in the text of the growth policy.
Examples of how the concept of resiliency spans community priorities.
Existing Actions taken or underway to support resiliency – Integrated Water Resources Plan, looped water lines, diverse economy, support to
social service organizations such as mental health providers, alternate service delivery of City operations, emergency systems training, avoiding
hazards such as Wildland Urban Interface and floodplains; joint Health department and coordinated responses; Joint Emergency Operations
Center, shared 911 system, and more.
Future Actions to strengthen resiliency – redundant water supply feeds being constructed in next year, increased water supply being pursued
through conservation and new source development, increase telecom robustness with fiber optic, continuing efforts to diversify economy,
increase base employment, and local supplies creation within state, climate adaptations and new climate plan, Triangle Community Plan under
development, and more
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 51 of 57
Page 49
IMPORTANCE
Implementation of the goals, objectives, and actions of this Plan will require work in coordination with action items listed below and referred to
in more detail in Chapter 2. Implementation works in coordination with the City’s Strategic Plan, Capital Improvements Program, and other
relevant plans and documents guiding the City. Some of the actions are already underway while others will occur in the future. Successful
implementation of this Plan will require dedication, engagement, and hard work from the community.
The Plan is intended to be a living document used daily by the City. Successful implementation of the Plan requires monitoring. Monitoring
determines how well the City’s initial objectives are working, where they can be improved, and what is not working. Monitoring will take place at
specified intervals based on information availability. Measuring the Plan’s efficacy (or outcomes) is a main tenant of the Plan. Not all factors
needed for success are controlled by the City.
A series of indicators have been identified for each Theme in order to track progress and setbacks. For example, one indicator under the
neighborhoods-based Theme evaluates housing stock diversity by looking at square footages, the number of bedrooms and bathrooms, and the
taxable value of homes. A diverse housing stock is indicative of a City that is more accessible and affordable to those of all incomes.
Page 50
MONITORING AND UPDATES
Tracking and monitoring the Plan’s intent is critical. Each Theme has one or more identified indicators, which use data to measure success
towards the goal. Each indicator listed below identifies a source—from where the data should be drawn, description, frequency—defines how
often the data is available, and set forth notes describing key considerations.
The development of indicators requires the City to establish where we are now in relation to each indicator. This provides a baseline from which
to track changes over time. Indicators were selected to be replicable, effective, and where possible, of a similar scope and nature as for
indicators for with peer cities. A target, or where we want to go, will be established for each indicator. In some cases the process of setting a
target will itself require substantial effort. The targets listed below are to give a general indication of intended trends; further refinement will
follow. If an indicator shows over time that the City is getting farther from, rather than closer to, the intended target, it may be necessary to
modify targets, policies, or standards. The process for revising the growth policy is described in Chapter 5. Development of specific targets for
each indicator should be completed within a year of Plan adoption. After that first year, an annual report on the status of each indicator should
be provided to the community.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 52 of 57
Page 54
AMENDMENT PROCESS
The Bozeman Community Plan was formed on the basis of significant community outreach efforts and the input of many persons and groups.
Alterations, whether the result of a review as triggered above or another reason, to the growth policy must provide a significant opportunity for
public participation and understanding of the proposed changes. Amendments to the growth policy must meet the same statutory standards as
the original adoption. Therefore, prior to the adoption of any amendment to the Plan, a public process must be provided.
A fundamental requirement for public participation is time for individuals to become aware of proposed amendments and to study the proposed
changes. A minimum active public review period of three months is to be expected.
This Plan has been prepared to balance a wide variety of interests. Changes to the Plan must continue the balance of needs and interests.
This Plan has been prepared to be internally consistent. Internal consistency meets one of the fundamental purposes of community planning—
Page 55
AMENDMENT CRITERIA
When an amendment to either the text of the Plan or the future land use map is requested it must be reviewed against the following criteria:
1. The proposed amendment must cure a deficiency in the growth policy or improve the growth policy to better respond to the needs of the
general community;
2. The proposed amendment does must not create inconsistencies within the growth policy, either between the goals and the maps or between
different goals and objectives;
3. The proposed amendment must be consistent with the overall intent of the growth policy; and
4. The proposed amendment may must not adversely affect the community as a whole or any significant portion thereof by including:
a. Significantly altering land use patterns and principles in a manner contrary to those established by this Plan,
b. Requiring unmitigated improvements to streets, water, sewer, or other public facilities or services, thereby impacting development of other
lands,
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 53 of 57
c. Adversely impacting existing uses because of unmitigated impacts on facilities and services, or
d. Negatively affecting the health and safety of the citizens.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 54 of 57
Table 2
General Comments
Edit Member Staff comment Action
Overall
Consider fully justifying text in layout Staff Discuss
Page 1:
The illustrative maps (not the FLUM) in the
document would benefit from review and revision
by the board. I would appreciate a review of the
entire map series in the document. In particular, I'd
like to see the Accessibility and Mobility Map
include future transit corridors (which were
included with a previous version of the document),
and perhaps some of the major bicycle corridors
from our Transportation Master Plan.
ME Board needs to determine how much is essential to
communicate the core ideas of the Plan. Prior
discussion was to point the reader to on-line resources
for most information due to the rapid pace of change in
the data and desire to keep this document lean.
Discuss
Pages 16-37
Are the GOA's [Goals, Objectives, Actions]
prioritized, should they be?
RR Prior Board discussion was to not prioritize.
Acknowledgment that priorities will shift over the term
of the plan as circumstances evolve and officials change
over. Questionable value for the work involved to
prioritize.
Discuss
There are several repeated GOA's there are better
ways to do this than repeating.
Revise to eliminate duplication
RR Discuss
Page 40:
I noted the sentence that each land use can be
implemented by multiple zoning districts. I don't
have much familiarity with the zoning here but this
should be simplified. We should strive to have 1 or
2 flexible zonings to implement a land use instead
of multiple more restrictive/ specific zonings.
RR Board has consolidated the number of land use
categories with this version of the growth policy. Board
may suggest changes to zoning but the Zoning
Commission and City Commission have statutory duties
over any code changes.
Discuss
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 55 of 57
Edit Member Staff comment Action
There are GOA's addressing this and its really
outside this plan but I think its noteworthy.
Page independent
Metrics. I'd like to see the metrics more tightly
integrated into the document, e.g. integrated into
each vision theme section, after the "importance"
section and before the goals / objectives / actions
(rather than cordoned off to an appendix-like
section at the back of the plan). If it's not possible
to include current scores with the current draft
then the metrics are too numerous and too
complicated and we need to reduce and simplify.
I'm happy to volunteer some of my time with
Strategic Services to identify data sources,
computation methodologies, and baseline scores
for the draft metrics.
ME Metrics were the subject of several months of
discussion. Current arrangement is the direction of the
Board. Some metrics apply to more than one goal or
objective. Could be rearranged to put metrics
associated with each Theme in each Theme rather than
consolidated.
The Board is making a recommendation, the City
Commission sets the final metrics and text. It is
premature to fully develop the metrics until the
Commission has endorsed them. Board must consider
whether the delay to assemble baseline values and
targets and have them accepted is worth delaying the
rest of the plan. Board can reduce the number of
proposed metrics.
Discuss
The implementation section is very lacking in detail.
We should include information like who is
assigned/working on the goals, we should have the
current status of all these items otherwise we are
in year 2 before we can assess change, we should
note if there are associated costs with each task.
RR See comment above.
The Board may make suggestions for priorities but does
not assign duties to staff.
Discuss
The plan does not currently establish a logical plan
and timeline for how the increases in density it
describes will be implemented. Under the current
plan, downtown growth is substantially limited to
the existing B-3 zoning district, and there's nothing
in the plan that lays groundwork for how the
neighborhoods immediately surrounding
ME Short Term Action List, page 50 recommends review of
the zoning map in Actions 1 and 2. Could add N-1.3, N-
2.2, N-3.1 and DCD-3.3 to the list of objectives
implemented with these actions.
Execution of the review and any directed upzoning is a
big project and the Commission will need to direct
prioritization and commit funding.
Withdrawn in
place of other
edits
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 56 of 57
Edit Member Staff comment Action
downtown will change over time to provide a
transition zone. Gradual and targeted upzoning is
essential to (and implicit in) many of the plan's
goals, but not specifically addressed. I think it may
be too late at this point to address this failing, but
I'd like to note it for the record.
As the City does not actually construct the buildings the
ability to establish a performance timeline for increased
physical density does not realistically exist.
Edit
Overall restructuring of plan and reprioritization
per general comment letter included in the packet.
JP This plan is for land use and the long term. It is
appropriate for the City to consider both short and long
term needs of the City. Short term (1-5 years)
budgeting is the responsibility of the Finance
Department. See attached letter from Finance Director
Donald.
Staff has reviewed the goals and objectives in light of
the present health and economic circumstances. The
current disruptions do not lessen overall community
priorities. Prioritization of implementation may be
altered as needed to address areas of emphasis. Staff
suggests an additional Theme 7, Resiliency with text as
presented to broadly address community resiliency and
adaptability.
Discuss
Can we use this plan to drive the housing plan to be
more aggressive. Include a specific % target or a
specific increase
RR The housing plan is an independent document and
beyond the control of the growth policy. Tasks to
implement the housing plan are under way.
What are our current height limitations, do they old
us back?
RR Maximum heights are set by each zoning district.
Evaluation of possible changes to maximum heights is
already under investigation with intent to bring
proposed revisions to the City Commission in October
2020.
Edits for discussion to the March 17, 2020 draft of the Bozeman Community Plan Page 57 of 57
Edit Member Staff comment Action
Conversation with architects on several larger projects
indicates that cost of construction is limiting above
three stories in many circumstances.