Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-20 City Commission Packet Materials - A1. Res 5133 Adopting Growth PolicyPage 1 of 31 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Public Hearing Dates: Planning Board Meeting (Public Hearing) July 21, July 28, and August 10, 2020 at 6:00 pm. Meetings held via WebEx, a video conferencing system. City Commission (public hearing) October 6 and 20, 2020, 6:00 pm. Meeting held via WebEx, a video conferencing system. City Commission (public hearing) November 17, 2020, 6:00 pm. Meeting held via WebEx, a video conferencing system. Project Description: Adoption of a new growth policy to entirely replace the existing growth policy. A growth policy documents community values, establishes goals, and translates those to planning for locations and nature of future land development. The adopted growth policy guides development of regulations, annexation, infrastructure installation and funding, and budget priorities. Final action is expected at this hearing, direction for revisions to the draft document may be given. Project Location: The proposed growth policy applies to the entire City and looks outwards to include property within the future potential municipal water and sewer services area. The boundary of the planning area is shown in Chapter 3 of the growth policy and Section 1 of this report. City Commission motion: Having reviewed and considered the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, application materials, and all the information presented, and having reviewed and evaluated all submitted public comment, I hereby move to adopt the findings presented in the staff report and to approve Resolution 5133, adopting the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Report Date: November 4, 2020 Staff Contact: Chris Saunders and Tom Rogers Agenda Item Type: Action- Legislative EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Unresolved Issues This draft growth policy comes to the City Commission with several questions for consideration. These questions are a part of the review process for such a document and are not deficiencies. 55 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 2 of 31 1. Public comment was received during the public hearings for the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The City Commission must consider those comments and determine whether or not to make revisions to the document. A listing of public comment is attached to this report. New comments will be added to the online archive as there are received. Comments are available at http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/Browse.aspx?startid=26&dbid=0. 2. Staff has revised the draft according to direction given by the City Commission on October 20, 2020. The City Commission needs to verify the revisions match their intent. A listing of edits by page number is attached to this report. 3. Maker Space Mixed Use. A new future land use designation was created and included in the draft plan, see page 52 of the draft. The new use is included in Table 4 describing zoning implementation. A map showing possible location for placement of Maker Space Mixed Use in included with the packet. Should the Commission wish to apply any of these locations a specific motion to do so is required. 4. A memo is attached describing three items, including Maker Space Mixed Use, a privately requested change for the future land use map, and revisions to the definition for missing middle housing, for the City Commission to consider as possible amendments Project Summary The City conducts long range planning to: 1. Protect the public health and safety and advance the well-being of the community at large, while respecting and protecting the interests of individuals within the community. 2. Provide a supportive framework for private action which balances the rights and responsibilities of many persons. 3. Facilitate the democratic development of the public policies and regulations that guide the community. 4. Improve the physical environment of the community as a setting for human activities, more functional, beautiful, healthful, and efficient. 5. Coordinate technical knowledge, political will, and long-range thinking in community development in both short and long term decisions. 6. Identifies the citizen's goals and priorities for their community and how they wish to carry out those ideals. 7. Encourage efficiency and effectiveness by government through coordinated policies and programs. 8. Serves as a reference bench mark for community priorities, physical attributes such as size, and social and economic information such as housing and jobs. A growth policy is an abstract of a community. 56 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 3 of 31 9. Support economic development by providing basic information about the community to prospective citizens and employers. A well done, and implemented, plan shows that a community is actively trying to improve their area. The formal term in state law for a community’s comprehensive plan is ‘growth policy’. The development of a growth policy is a primary responsibility of the Planning Board and is directed by Sections 76-1-601 through 76-1-606, MCA. The growth policy sets broad policy standards and coordinates between many municipal functions. It is the land use policy document for the community. Since the adoption of the Bozeman Community Plan in 2009, Bozeman has grown in both area and population. The plan held up well under the strain but needed to be updated to address changing conditions. The City Commission directed the Planning Board and Staff to prepare an update in 2016. The process began with data collection summarized in the 2018 report by Economic Planning Systems. The Planning Board conducted many public meetings and outreach events to garner input from the community. The proposed plan had been posted to the project website and advertised. The Planning Board accepted public comment and began a review of the document. The Planning Board directed a number of changes to the text and future land use map. On June 16, 2020 the Planning Board directed changes to the document and that a public hearing be advertised for consideration of adoption of the revised draft. The directed changes have been completed. A new draft incorporating all Planning Board amendments has been published and noticed to the public. A revised document including City Commission directed amendments to the text and map is attached to this report. . For additional background information and discussion about the City’s considerations about growth please see Appendix D. Substantive changes from the growth policy currently in effect The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP) largely confirms and carries forward community priorities established in prior growth policies. The following items are significant changes between the proposed draft plan and the existing adopted plan. To see all changes review the documents. The current document is 2009 Bozeman Community Plan. The October 20, 2020 draft of the proposed new growth policy is linked here. 1. Narrower focus. The City has adopted several additional plans for sustainability, affordable housing, and other topics since the last growth policy. The Planning Board deliberately narrowed the focus of the proposed draft to emphasize land use. Therefore, subjects with their own plans have less discussion and there are fewer chapters in the proposed draft. People wanting information on those subjects should see the specific topic plan they are interested in. 57 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 4 of 31 2. Slightly expanded planning area. The planning area boundary was expanded in two areas to allow examination of community edges and transition to County areas as well as to coordinate with other facility plans. The two changes are along Huffine Lane to include the Rae Water and Sewer district and in the northwest corner of planning area. 3. Document formatting. The Bozeman Community Plan uses a different document format and structure. Chapter structure, page layout, and inclusion of web links to access on-line documents referenced in the plan are provided. Chapters are considerably shorter and are primarily focused on the goals and objectives. Background information is contained in the appendices or the independent topic plans. 4. Increased emphasis on mixed use. The Urban Neighborhood category in particular is broader in its language. Some of the land use categories have been renamed and consolidated. 5. Future Land Use Map. The future land use map, see Chapter 3, has two substantial changes. A. The map does not show only the use of land needed to serve new population expected over the 20 year reach of the growth policy. Instead, the map shows how the City thinks land throughout the planning area should develop in the future if the landowners choose to change from its current use. This may take very many years to come to pass. The City continues its encouragement of annexation occurring prior to development of land. B. The Business Park Mixed Use and Suburban Residential categories were removed from the land use categories. All of these areas have been changed to another category. Several categories from the 2009 growth policy were aggregated into the Parks and Open Lands category. 6. Access to the final document is expected to be primarily through the City’s website. The future land use map in particular is of a scale that it is easier to read and understand with this method. Access through the web also facilitates review of the map is association with other information such as stream locations or zoning. Planning Board Recommendation After the advertised public hearing on July 21, 2020, the Planning Board continued their discussion to July 28th and August 10th. The Planning Board recommended a draft document to the City Commission with several amendments. Hyperlinks to the public hearing video recordings are provided above with each date. In addition to the formal recommendation transmittal by Resolution of the Planning Board, the Planning Board also made the following recommendations regarding the updated growth policy. These are separated from the document as the Planning Board concluded they were more in the nature of suggestions or operational actions rather than plan draft text. • The Planning Board recommends to the city commission that actions, staff, and budgetary resources relating to the update of the NCOD be given a high priority 58 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 5 of 31 • The Planning Board recommends to the City Commission that actions, staff, and budgetary resources relating to the mitigation of the “Missing Middle” problem including revisions to the UDC be given the highest priority • The Planning Board recommends to the City Commission that action, staff, and budgetary resources, related to affordable housing be given a high priority. • The Planning Board recommends adding more graphics and illustrations to the document. City Commission Action to Date The City Commission held public hearings on October 6th and October 20th. At the October 20th public hearing the City Commission directed amendments to the draft plan. A list of all amendments made and an updated draft of the growth policy is attached to this staff report. Alternatives 1. Adoption of Resolution 5133 to approve of the growth policy as presented; 2. Adoption of Resolution 5133 to approve of the growth policy as presented with modifications; 3. Return the growth policy to the Planning Board with direction to address certain issues; 3. Do not adopt Resolution 5133 and retain the growth policy presently in effect. 59 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 6 of 31 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1 Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1 Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2 Substantive changes from the growth policy currently in effect ........................................ 3 Planning Board Recommendation ...................................................................................... 4 City Commission Action to Date ........................................................................................ 5 Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 1 – MAP AND ILLUSTRATION SERIES ............................................................ 7 SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS .................................... 12 SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ........................................................... 12 Purpose 1. Improve the present health, safety, convenience, and welfare of their citizens. 13 Purpose 2. Plan for the future development of their communities to the end that highway systems be carefully planned; ............................................................................ 14 Purpose 3. That new community centers grow only with adequate highway, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities; ................................................................. 14 Purpose 4. That the needs of agriculture, industry, and business be recognized in future growth; 15 Purpose 5. That residential areas provide healthy surroundings for family life; ........... 18 Purpose 6. The growth of the community be commensurate with and promotive of the efficient and economical use of public funds. .................................................................. 18 APPENDIX A - COORDINATION WITH GALLATIN COUNTY AND OTHERS .......... 19 APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ................................................... 20 APPENDIX C - REVIEWING STAFF .................................................................................. 22 APPENDIX D – PROJECT BACKGROUND ....................................................................... 22 To grow or not to grow? If so, how? ................................................................................ 24 60 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 7 of 31 SECTION 1 – MAP AND ILLUSTRATION SERIES Map 1: Proposed Planning Area Boundary, Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Current City limits shown in white. The Planning Area for land uses is coordinated with the City’s planning area for transportation, water, and sewer facilities. 61 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 8 of 31 Map 2: Future Land Use Map, Bozeman Community Plan, page 55. See the online version for ability to zoom in to individual properties. Primary access to the map after adoption will be through the City’s website. A larger format version is attached to this report. 62 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 9 of 31 Map 3: Context Map indicating development and lot size patterns throughout the planning area. A full sized version is an attachment to this report. See discussion in Appendix D. 63 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 10 of 31 Map 4: Regional Context Map 64 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 11 of 31 Illustration 1: Population Trend in City of Bozeman, MT, page 6 Illustration 2: Plan Creation Process Summary, page 12 65 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 12 of 31 Illustration 3: Growth Policy Relation to Zoning and Land Development. Page 16 of BCP SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS Having considered the criteria established for a growth policy map amendment, the Staff finds the draft document meets the requirements of state law and can be adopted. The Planning Board voted to recommend a draft of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 document. The Resolution transmitting the recommendation is attached to this report. The Resolution of transmittal, Planning Board Resolution 20-1 was passed unanimously. The City Commission will hold public hearing(s) on the growth policy prior to any action to approve, amend or reject the document. The City Commission hearings were held on October 6, 2020, October 20, 2020, and will be held on November 17, 2020. SECTION 3 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS Planning staff reviewed this application for a growth policy against the criteria set forth in Section 76-1-102 MCA. Staff finds that this proposal satisfies all of the required review criteria. The revisions directed by the City Commission on October 20, 2020 do not cause different findings than those originally provided. 66 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 13 of 31 Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials, municipal codes, standards, plans, public comment, and all other materials available during the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis in this report is a summary of the completed review. There are required steps to adopt or revise a growth policy. For this growth policy, the Planning Board conducted multiple public hearings after proper notice. These hearing were both during development of the document and for the public to review and comment on the document proposed by the Planning Board. The Planning Board provided a recommendation to the City Commission by resolution. The City Commission adopted a resolution of intent on August 25, 2020. The City Commission’s hearing(s) were properly noticed. At the City Commission hearings all interested parties were able to learn about the plan, express their views, and hear the City Commission discussion on the matter. The City Commission directed amendments on October 20th. A public hearing was held on November 17, 2020 so the public could review and comment on the revised document. After these steps occur the City Commission may adopt, revise, or reject the growth policy. In considering an application for approval of a new growth policy, the Planning Board and City Commission must consider the purposes of planning. As adoption of a growth policy is a legislative action, the City Commission has broad latitude to determine policy direction. Section 76-1-601 MCA specifies the required contents of a growth policy. The same section also allows for a number of voluntary items. State law allows substantial community discretion in addressing the required subjects. Attached to this report is a table showing where all required elements have been addressed. This is a complete replacement and not an amendment. Therefore, the amendment criteria of Chapter 17 of the present growth policy do not apply. There are no specific review criteria for adopting a growth policy in state law. However, 76-1-102 MCA establishes the purposes for planning. Lacking other defined statutory criteria, these purposes are the standard against which adoption of a growth policy is measured by the City. These items overlap in various ways and working on one will often advance another. The description below is a summary. The complete intent and compliance with criteria may be evaluated by reviewing the full document, supporting special topic plans, as well as this report. Purpose 1. Improve the present health, safety, convenience, and welfare of their citizens. Criterion is met. The BCP meets this criterion by coordinating between multiple facility plans. Since the previous growth policy was adopted the water, sewer, fire, and transportation facility plans have all been updated. The facility plans address transportation, fire protection, parks and recreation, water, wastewater, and other services. All of these facilities protect health and safety. Safe and functional transportation supports timely emergency responses. 67 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 14 of 31 Water systems support suppression of fire and avoidance of communicable disease. Parks and trails encourage a physically active and healthy community. Other elements of the plan such as support for economic development support the general welfare by encouraging an economically vigorous community with resources to meet the needs of citizens. By establishing common community goals and aspirations, land use regulations can be drafted and policies enacted to advance those goals. The BCP addresses the purposes of planning identified in the statutory purposes of planning. Health, safety, convenience, and welfare are issues woven throughout the document and the various topic specific plans for various City functions. The requirements for an infrastructure plan and coordination with Gallatin County are included in Appendix E of the document. Effective collaboration improves all of the elements in this criterion. Purpose 2. Plan for the future development of their communities to the end that highway systems be carefully planned; Criterion is met. The City, Gallatin County, MDT, and others participate in coordinated transportation planning through the Transportation Coordinating Committee. A new municipal transportation plan was adopted in 2017. The transportation plan covers the same planning area as the BCP. The street character and layout is consistent with the BCP. The BCP establishes goals and policies which supports development of a fully functional, multi- modal transportation system as does the transportation plan. See especially Chapter 2, Theme 5. The transportation plan and BCP allow coordination across jurisdictional boundaries so that as annexation occurs and roads or other transportation means are developed the transportation system will function efficiently. The City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County have prepared the Triangle Community Plan (TCP) to facilitate coordination between the jurisdictions in the areas where their planning areas overlap. A key element of the TCP is coordination of transportation systems and standards. The adoption process for the TCP has been completed with adoption by all three participants. Bozeman accepted the TCP in April 2020. Implementation of the TCP has taken initial steps beginning with a trails plan for the Triangle area now underway. Chapter 2, Theme 5 of the BCP establishes policies and outcomes for mobility. Integration of land use planning and transportation planning is encouraged. Support for adequate transportation through many modes and alternatives is stated. This is a continuation of policy from prior planning efforts. Purpose 3. That new community centers grow only with adequate highway, utility, health, educational, and recreational facilities; Criterion is met. The BCP continues established policies for concurrency of infrastructure necessary to meet the needs of development. These policies have been formalized as 68 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 15 of 31 development standards and requirements in the municipal code. The various facility plans referenced in the BCP describe service levels and facilities required to meet current and future needs. The facility plans are periodically updated as needed, generally on a 7-10 year cycle. As plans are updated the new information is integrated with the growth policy during its regular updates. Chapters 26, 32, 34, 36, 38, 40, and 42 of the municipal code enact these plans and purposes through regulations. The facility planning process enables engagement with the public as well as other agencies such as Gallatin County. Formal coordination such as mutual aid agreements for emergency services, the Transportation Coordinating Committee, the Planning Coordination Committee, and others support and facilitate interagency interaction and support. Some of these items are provided by an entity other than the City of Bozeman. Those items are also addressed with a demonstration of compliance being required during the land development review process. The intent of this criterion is brought into physical existence through the land development standards adopted by the City and other regulatory agencies. The City does not control or direct the School District in acquiring property or construction of school facilities. However, the City does engage with the School District through their long range planning committee and the growth policy is a valued resource in that work. The City and School District have an interlocal agreement regarding establishment of minor and major projects. By planning for the future the City enables school districts to consider future land use patterns when they acquire property for future schools. In locating commercial nodes on the future land use map, location of major transportation routes and other facilities as depicted in the various facility plans was considered. Placement at major intersections establishes a basis for sense of place, interacts with and supports multi- modal transportation, and has potential to reduce total travel demand by enabling trip chaining and pass-by trips. Adequate provision of water supply and disposal is strongly affected by external regulations. Clean Water Act standards and other regulations such as state water rights are beyond the City’s control. Acts by implementing agencies to be responsive to municipal needs or to place obstructions to compliance and provision of services to a growing community may be the ultimate limit on ability of the City to expand in population or area. Purpose 4. That the needs of agriculture, industry, and business be recognized in future growth; Criterion is met. The BCP sets aside a land base for all of these activities. The land use pattern, provision of timely and adequate infrastructure, and overall community health supported in the plan support a healthy economy. Policies encourage the development of local production and businesses in a wide range of areas, including agriculture. The future 69 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 16 of 31 land use map in Chapter 3 includes a land base adequate to meet the expected needs of the community for economic activity for the planning period of the growth policy, at least the next 20 years. The BCP coordinates policies and facilities in order to provide necessary services at a constrained cost. The BCP, continuing existing policy, encourages urban intensity annexed development. Development on municipal services allows a much higher intensity of uses. Urban development within the City lowers stress on agricultural properties to stop production and reduces conflicts with rural residential development disrupting agricultural operations. There is existing unannexed and undeveloped areas within the outer limits of the City. See the attached map of vacant properties. The vacant areas depicted represent a small fraction of the total City area. Some undeveloped land is also within the City limits. However, the total of vacant and undeveloped land would be inadequate to accommodate all of the expected new development over the planning period. As shown on the map, a large portion of the vacant and undeveloped area is already in the development process. A large, if not the largest, portion of the existing buildings in the City have been constructed within the past 30 years and have substantial service life remaining. The policies of the BCP encourage redevelopment of suitable sites. This is a long standing planning objective of the City and is occurring, Examples of reinvestment in previously developed areas of the community can be seen in the Downtown and N. 7th Avenue areas, and elsewhere. The redevelopment is usually several times more intensive in use. However, due to the recent construction of much of the community the financial viability of redeveloping in some areas is limited. Therefore, due to both limited vacant area and suitable areas for redevelopment outward expansion of the City areas will be needed to meet expected growth. The overall Planning Area for the BCP is about 70 square miles. The City has approximately 21 square miles within its legal boundaries. Although the Planning Area numbers seem much larger they don’t represent as much expansion or potential for change as may appear. The attached growth policy update context map shows the City and Planning Area boundaries. Also shown on the map and legend are the size and number of parcels outside of the City and within the Planning Area. Out of the approximately 49 square miles outside the City and within the Planning Area there are only 148 parcels that are larger than 40 acres. A number of these larger parcels are physically constrained from development by floodplains, steep slopes, or other limitations. In comparison, there are 3,949 parcels that are five acres or less. There are more parcels of less than five acres than all other types of parcels combined. This demonstrates that the Planning Area outside of the City limits is substantially transitioning to a non-agricultural land use pattern. Recognizing this reality, the future land use map (FLUM) in Chapter 3 does not attempt to specify which parcels will develop to urban nature over the 20 year term of the plan. A larger copy of the map is attached to this report. Rather, it depicts the City’s preference for land use 70 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 17 of 31 at such time as it changes from what land use it is today. Adoption of the future land use map does not require development, annex property, or otherwise change existing conditions. For some parcels, the change may take many years more than the time horizon of the BCP. Should owners want to continue current land uses the BCP does not require a change in use. The City’s encourages undeveloped lands to remain undeveloped until such time as they can be annexed and developed at urban densities. Low density rural or suburban development typically relies on onsite water and sewer which have negative impacts on the environment. At such time as urban services become available, the process of redeveloping low density rural or suburban development is usually controversial and expensive. Keeping land in agricultural production provides land stewardship, food production, and maintenance of open lands. The City has various policies to support a continuing and economically viable agriculture industry in the area. The City works with Gallatin County to encourage persons interested in development who are within the City’s utilities service area to annex prior to development. Low density development creates difficulties in later providing for extensions of municipal services. The City has encouraged infill/redevelopment for many years. As shown on the attached vacant property map, there is not a large quantity of vacant property within the City boundaries. The physical reality is matching the policy. Therefore, substantial infill projects are likely to include replacement of existing structures and redevelopment and further development of existing buildings and sites. Due to scale of the map, the printed map does not attempt to depict watercourses, wetlands, or other site constraints on development. The expectation is that after adoption the map will primarily be accessed and reviewed through the City’s Community Development Webviewer. This online tool enables the user to overlay and display a wide variety of information layers overlaid on an aerial photograph of the community and surrounding area and adjust the scale of the displayed map. The viewer enables the user to see mapped watercourses and other data overlaid on the FLUM. The City’s adopted regulations and standards to protect natural features, historic areas, and other issues of concern remain in effect. In preparation of the growth policy, the City hired Economic Planning Systems to collect background information and perform some trend analysis for people and the economy. Their report is included as an attachment to this report. Trend analysis looks at past and present circumstances and from that knowledge looks to the future. The report identified future population, housing, and business growth likelihoods and what land base might be required over the 20 year planning period. The report final draft was received in early 2018 and relied on data from 2016 and earlier. Such a delay between available data and completion of analysis is expected and is a result of 71 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 18 of 31 the time lag in collection and publication of necessary public data. Looking back at actual performance in 2017-2019, the City has been experiencing higher than projected housing and business growth. The COVID pandemic and associated impacts as well as impacts of events such as the large fires on the West Coast were not factored into analysis of past trends. This is not a criticism of the work but an inherent limitation on any trend analysis since such events did not occur during the period used for the base analysis. However, such events have occurred. At least in the short term, there are indications of potential strong interest in people relocating to the area which may affect future growth patterns and needs for land. It is premature to reliably predict outcomes of these unusual events over the next years. The impact of such unexpected events supports the approach to designate ultimate outcomes on the FLUM map rather than tie too directly to projected development rates and patterns. The FLUM does: guide annexation and municipal zoning decisions, show the City’s long term expectations for property when uses change, and enable coordination with internal and external governmental agencies. The FLUM does not: change existing zoning, annex property, or require development before the landowner chooses. Purpose 5. That residential areas provide healthy surroundings for family life; Criterion is met. Residential areas which provide healthy surroundings are protected in the plan by policies requiring adequate mitigation of development impacts, provision of public and private utilities, provision of parks and trails, protection of the natural environment, and a broad view of community health. Substantially isolating residences from all services is not considered supportive of healthy surroundings as it can increase health hazards, such as asthma from poor air quality caused by excessive vehicle use. The BCP calls for adequate development review and community maintenance to address and mitigate hazards. The City uses several tools including building codes and permits, subdivision review, zoning, and others to protect public health, safety, and welfare; including but not limited to providing healthy surroundings for residential areas. A diverse range of housing opportunities is encouraged and supported to meet the wide range of housing needs in the community. Purpose 6. The growth of the community be commensurate with and promotive of the efficient and economical use of public funds. Criterion is met. The BCP describes a compact future growth pattern which maximizes the value from previous public expenditures and reduces future expenditures. Distance is one of the largest impacts on cost of delivery of services. A compact and land efficient development pattern provides benefits to many users from each installed unit of capacity. This applies both to capital and operational costs. 72 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 19 of 31 As an example, compare a project now under the construction in the B-3 district called One 11 lofts located at Lamme Street and N. Willson Avenue which includes 54 homes on approximately 0.5 acres of land. This project has approximately 363 linear feet of adjacent street and utility lines. A portion of the more typical residential area of the recently platted Gran Cielo subdivision uses 7.92 acres and approximately 2,306 linear feet of adjacent street and utility lines to service the same number of future homes. The growth policy and municipal regulations enable both types of projects as a diversity of housing types is needed to meet the diverse needs of a community. Coordination of greenfield and infill development, appropriate development standards to ensure provision of adequate facilities for all types of allowed development, and concurrence with adequacy of public utilities and services maximizes public and private benefits. The various topic plans and BCP seek to maximize the efficiency of transportation and utility investments. This is done by encouraging a compact development pattern that supports a multiple route, multi-modal transportation approach which spreads demand over diverse travel networks and longer periods and provides travel alternatives which are less costly. All of these approaches lessen and delay need to expand streets and other facilities. This reduces both capital cost for installation and maintenance of expanded facilities. Maintaining the high existing quality of life also supports this criterion by encouraging community reinvestment and renewal which maintains a pleasant environment and constrains demand for public services. See Appendix D for additional discussion on land consumption by urban, suburban, and rural development. APPENDIX A - COORDINATION WITH GALLATIN COUNTY AND OTHERS The City works to coordinate land use planning with Gallatin County. The City reached out to the Gallatin County Planning Office during the plan development process to seek input and share information. There is not a shared planning board for the Bozeman Community Plan area at this time. The City and Gallatin County do both participate in the Planning Coordinating Committee (PCC). The PCC was established in 2016 to be a forum for consideration of land use policy and other matters of shared concerns between its participants. The PCC recommended to the PCC member governing bodies a policy plan for the area called the Triangle which is roughly between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners. This plan completed development. All three jurisdictions have taken action to accept or adopt the plan. The Triangle Community Plan is available on the County’s website. The overall vision of the document is below. This vision correlates well with the themes, goals, and map included in the Bozeman Community Plan that is the subject of this report. “3.1 Triangle Plan Vision 73 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 20 of 31 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. Belgrade, Bozeman and Gallatin County will coordinate land use in the Triangle 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 centers 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.” Portions of the above text are included in the BCP, see page 37. The City also collaborates with various agencies in preparing the various topic plans identified in Appendix B of the BCP. Collaboration occurs through mutual aid agreements for emergency services, shared services such as the Health Department and 911, and other formal and informal means. An infrastructure plan as outlined in 76-1-601(4)(C), MCA is also included as Appendix E and addresses coordination with other agencies. Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade have been contacted at various points during the development of this growth policy. Most recently, they have been provided links to all documents elements and invited to offer comments and suggestions on the draft document. APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT Public input and comment has been solicited since the beginning of the project. See Appendix A for a description of methods and events. This appendix describes notice and comment during the formal adoption process. Notice of the July 21, 2020 Planning Board public hearing was published in the Legal Ads section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on 07/05/2020, 07/12/2020 and 07/19/2020. The notice of the July 28, 2020 Planning Board public hearing was published in the Legal Ads section of the Bozeman Daily Chronicle on 07/19/2020 and 07/26/2020. A news item was also 74 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 21 of 31 published through the City’s website directing people to the new plan draft and review schedule. Public comment has been solicited in many forms throughout the public process from 2016- 2020. Multiple public hearings were held during development of the plan to consider drafts of the document. Each hearing was given public notice in excess of what is required by law. Comments have come in through many means. Written comments submitted outside of public events have been aggregated to the City’s Laserfiche electronic document archive. This made them available to the Planning Board and any other interested person throughout the planning process. Comments were also received verbally at the many public meetings held by the Planning Board. These comments are included in the recordings of each meeting. Comments were considered as they came in as the Board developed the goals, objectives, future land use map, and all other elements of the BCP. At their June 16, 2020 public meeting, the Planning Board considered various edits and public comments to date. At the conclusion of the meeting the Planning Board directed preparation of a revised document draft for public hearing and recommendation to the City Commission. A number of public comments were received this spring in connection with a privately initiated growth policy map amendment. Those comments blended thoughts on the specific application as well as the larger growth policy update. To ensure the public has its full opportunity to participate in the development of this growth policy those comments were provided with the packet for the July 21st public hearing. In addition, public comments were received regarding the future land use map after the June 16th meeting. All written comments not previously considered by the Planning Board were included in the packet for the July 21st public hearing. Additional comments were received during the three public hearings conducted by the Planning Board on the July 21, 2020 draft of the BCP. The Planning Board addressed all comments prior to concluding their deliberations on August 10th. As the City Commission began their deliberations a resolution of intent to amend the growth policy was heard and passed on August 25, 2020. The notice of intent was advertised through the City Commission agenda. The City Commission directed the City Manager to set hearing dates and provide public notice for the public hearings before the City Commission. Public hearings were set and advertised for October 6th and October 20, 2020. Notice was provided through the Bozeman Daily Chronicle legal ads on 9/27/2020 and 10/04/2020, publication of the scheduled hearing dates on the City’s website, and distribution of news posts through social media and the City’s website. Prior to the public hearings by the City Commission, the City staff conducted three public meetings on September 16th, 23rd, and 30th to present the plan text, future land use map, and answer questions. These meetings enabled the public to learn about the plan prior to the public hearing process beginning. A recording of each meeting was also posted on the BCP project 75 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 22 of 31 website so people could review them at their convenience. The City staff also presented an overview of the plan to the Inter-Neighborhood Council at their meeting on September 10, 2020 and encouraged the representatives to share the public meeting schedule and project website with their members. The City identified those parcels where the FLUM materially changed during this process and where ready access to owner information was available. The City mailed approximately 1,700 postcards to landowners affected by the FLUM changes advising them of changes affecting their property and directing them to the project website where maps and text were available to explain the changes. The City Commission heard and discussed public comment at the October 6th and 20th public hearings. At the October 20th public hearing several amendments to the draft plan were directed. Staff prepared a revised draft accordingly and posted for public review. A final public hearing was set and advertised for November 17, 2020. Notice was provided through the Bozeman Daily Chronicle legal ads on 11/5/2020, 11/8/2020, 11/11/2020, and 11/15/2020, publication of the scheduled hearing dates on the City’s website, and distribution of news posts through social media and the City’s website. Written public comment has been received throughout the course of the plan development and consideration for adoption. All public comments received prior to the August 10, 2020 Planning Board final action were considered by them. All comments have been provided to the City Commission as part of public hearing process. A listing and subject summary of projects received after the Planning Board action to recommend approval and prior to the packet deadline for the November 17th hearing is attached to this report. Written public comments are archived in the City’s online Laserfiche archive system. Any person with web access may review submitted comments. Comments are organized by year. Links are provided here to the comments on the growth policy update submitted in 2018, 2019, and 2020. As new comments are received they will be added to the 2020 folder. If the City Commission review continues into 2021, the City Clerk with create a new file for that calendar year. APPENDIX C - REVIEWING STAFF Applicant: City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230 Bozeman MT 59771 Report By: Chris Saunders, AICP, Community Development Manager APPENDIX D – PROJECT BACKGROUND The formal term in state law for a community’s comprehensive plan is ‘growth policy’. The development of a growth policy is a primary responsibility of the Planning Board and is 76 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 23 of 31 directed by Sections 76-1-601 through 76-1-606, MCA. Bozeman has had a formal comprehensive plan since 1958. Careful planning by individuals and small groups prior to that time created the historic areas of the community. Since 1958, Bozeman has adopted six comprehensive plans. The growth policy sets broad policy standards and coordinates between many municipal functions. It is the primary land use policy document for the community. A community has broad latitude in the level of detail they wish to address in their growth policy. Certain subjects are required to be addressed. As shown in illustration 3, Section 1 of this report, the growth policy is a foundation for other municipal programs and actions such as zoning regulations. The City Commission adopted Resolution 4112 on July 21, 2008. Resolution 4112 commits the City to undertaking certain coordinated infrastructure planning with Gallatin County. This is not a jointly adopted growth policy or topic plan but coordination occurs within individual growth policies and facility plans. The purpose of this planning is to enable the rational and functional expansion of the City. This coordination manifests in many ways. Most recently the City and County cooperated in the preparation of the Triangle Community Plan (TCP); a neighborhood plan under the County’s and City of Belgrade’s growth policies which includes portions of the Bozeman planning area. The TCP is to coordinate goals and policies between Gallatin County, City of Belgrade, and City of Bozeman in areas where respective interests overlap. The City also conducts topic specific infrastructure planning such as for transportation and water. Topic plans look at existing and future services areas and needs both within the existing City boundaries and adjacent areas for expansion. Since the adoption of the Bozeman Community Plan in 2009, Bozeman has grown in both area and population. The plan held up well under the strain but needed to be updated to address changing conditions. The City Commission directed the Planning Board and Staff to prepare an update in 2016. The process began with data collection and trend projections summarized in the 2018 report by Economic Planning Systems. The Planning Board conducted many public meetings and outreach events to garner input from the community. Appendix A of the growth policy describes the various outreach approaches. Various elements and iterations of the document were reviewed by the public. A compiled complete draft document was made available in December 2019. A public hearing was held by the Planning Board on December 17, 2019. Another was scheduled for March 17, 2019 but was cancelled due to COVID restrictions. The proposed plan had been posted to the project website and advertised. After the plan was initially posted online in December 2019, numerous public meetings were held by the Planning Board during this time to discuss document revisions. These meetings were held in person and after COVID emerged electronically due to restrictions on in person public meetings. The recordings of these meetings, agendas and all materials were and are 77 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 24 of 31 available to the public through the City’s website and other means. The Planning Board accepted public comment and reviewed the draft document. The Planning Board directed a number of changes to the text and future land use map. On June 16, 2020 the Planning Board directed changes to the document and that a public hearing be advertised for consideration of adoption of the revised draft with the intent to complete their review and send a recommendation to the City Commission. The directed changes were completed, a new draft published, and noticed to the public. After public hearings on July 21, July 28, and August 10, 2020, the Planning Board sent their recommendation to the City Commission. The Resolution transmitting the recommendation is attached to this report. The City Commission held public hearings on October 6th and 20th. After due consideration they directed amendments to the plan text and future land use map. A revised draft was prepared, notices, and made available to the public. A final public hearing was scheduled for November 17, 2020. To grow or not to grow? If so, how? These questions are frequently asked during discussion about land use planning and development. As shown on Illustration 1, Section 1 of this report, Bozeman has experienced growth over the past 50 years with only 1 decline. This same pattern is largely seen in Gallatin County as a whole. Many factors have influenced the decisions of individuals and businesses to move to Bozeman and the Gallatin Valley. These factors include but are not limited to: nearby extensive outdoor recreation opportunities, Montana State University, people who left the area for careers returning, changing technology enabling remote work, and people becoming familiar with the area during visits to Yellowstone National Park. Developing factors that appear to be increasing interest in the local area include climate change, increasing economic opportunities in the local area with technology and other sector growth, and recently the COVID-19 pandemic. Separate from increases in the number of people, other changes have caused increases in number of homes. As family and household sizes have decreased over time additional houses are required to serve the same population. For example, in 1970, the average household size in Bozeman was 3.25 people; in 2010, the US Census found that 1/3 of all households in Bozeman were occupied by one individual and the community had an overall average of 2.2 persons per household. The impact of this one change can be seen looking at the number of homes needed to house 10,000 people. In 1970, 3,077 homes would be needed. In 2010, 4,545 homes would be needed. The change in household size means that for the same population the number of homes must increase by 47.8%. That increased number of homes 78 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 25 of 31 requires more streets, water and sewer pipes, and similar expanded municipal and private facilities. The cost of services per person correspondingly increases. Should this trend reverse, the City could see large population increases without construction of additional homes. Therefore, Bozeman has expanded in population and land area from in-migration, change in the demographic makeup of the community, new births, and annexation of new areas to serve new or existing residents. Community change is dynamic and affected by many forces. It is also inevitable. Even if population stayed the same, as shown above, there are forces that make outward and inward changes in a community. Context of the growth question Consideration of Bozeman’s growth cannot be separated from the larger context of the Gallatin Valley. Bozeman has many identities. When asked what people think of when they describe Bozeman answers ranged from the legal geographic boundaries, postal zip codes, what they could see from a viewing point, and the scope of its total economic area of influence. As shown in Section 1, Map 4, there are other communities in the area who also plan for their futures. Gallatin County is in the process of updating their growth policy. The City of Belgrade recently completed a growth policy update. All three jurisdictions recently participated in preparing the Triangle Community Plan. The Planning Area for the BCP is approximately 70 square miles. Most of that area lies outside of the existing municipal limits. However, it is not free from development pressure or change. As shown in Section 1, Map 3, much of the land within the Planning Area and outside of the City has already been subdivided and developed to some degree. The following excerpt from the map shows the southern portion of the Planning Area. The colored areas are divided into parcels of sizes as classified in the map legend. As shown on the legend, only 8% of all the parcels in the nearly 49 square miles outside of the City limits are larger than 20 acres. Twenty acres is the minimum area generally 79 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 26 of 31 considered eligible to be classified as agricultural property. This parcel pattern reflects many decades of land use decisions by private property owners as well as various governmental agencies. A larger version of the map including designation of the use by structures on each parcel is attached to this report. The Planning Area outside of the City’s legal limits remains under the final authority of Gallatin County. The County and City do not have a shared planning board or regulations at this time. As described in Appendix A of this report and Chapter 2, Theme 7 of the growth policy, the City does work with Gallatin County on land use planning issues. However, should a land owner outside of the City ask to change zoning or subdivide land the County Commission has the final decision. Areas that people often describe as being in Bozeman such as the Woodland Park and Middle Creek developments along Huffine Lane are outside of the City limits and were approved by the County. Regardless of how the future land use map designates property, until the property is annexed the map is advisory and development may occur contrary to the future land uses shown on the FLUM. How does the City enable growth? For new people and businesses to come and establish in the community the City must be able to provide land area, utility services, and other functions. Beginning at the founding of the City and continuing to today, it has been the policy of the City to welcome new residents and businesses. It hasn’t always been smooth or easy to do so. It has also been the long standing policy of the City to strive to balance the interests of new and existing residents. Therefore, the City has established standards and procedures to strive to ensure that new development proportionately contributes to the services and facilities needed to support new development. The following examples identify significant policies but it is not an exhaustive list. • Annexation: Annexation is almost entirely initiated by the landowner. The City has limited ability to start an annexation process. Annexation is often motivated by a desire to develop property or to address a failed on-site septic system. At the time of annexation, land owners commit to provide or do provide easements for major roadways, and to follow the City’s land development standards requiring the landowner to provide needed infrastructure for development of the land. • Water Rights: All water in the state not reserved to the Federal Government or Tribal Government is controlled by the State of Montana. No one can use water without the State’s permission. Such permission is called a water right. When new development occurs, the City requires that new development to provide either water rights to the City or to pay an equal amount of money so the City can acquire water rights 80 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 27 of 31 adequate to serve the new development. Existing water users are not required to pay for water rights for new development. • Impact Fees: Impact fees are costs charged to new development to construct fire, water, sewer, and transportation facilities to support new development. There are strict rules to ensure that the impact fees don’t fix existing problems. Impact fees enable the City to more closely keep up with water and sewer treatment capacity and other infrastructure needed for new development to be functional and safe. • Utility planning: The City conducts long range planning for water, sewer, transportation, parks, and other services. This planning work examines the needs for existing users and future users. This enables the City to construct facilities before big bottlenecks occur. Since a water line can have a service life of at least 70 years, sizing them correctly is a significant concern to avoid future service limits and failures. Knowing what services are needed enables the City to work effectively and cost efficiently to serve existing and future users. Recent expansion and upgrades at the City’s water and sewer treatment facilities were required both for maintaining legal compliance with treatment standards for existing users and to enable new users. • Regulations: The City adopts standards for development to correlate timing of new development with the services needed to serve it. This protects the public health and safety. The regulations also provide predictability in decision making to both existing and new members of the community. Predictability is a very important element in the complex and difficult public and private decisions relating to growth. What if the City did not encourage growth within its borders? The City is not required to grow in area or population. There is undeveloped area within the current City limits as shown on the attached vacant land map. The undeveloped area would eventually fill in with development. The City could choose to not annex new property. The City could stop acquiring water rights, stop expanding treatment capacity for water or sewer, or could strictly limit development opportunities through regulations on development intensity. All of these would result sooner or later in many fewer homes and businesses than would likely otherwise be present if the City encouraged growth. There is additional capacity presently in the City’s systems due to planned “working room” to account for the fact that expansion of capacity often comes in large increments and therefore some excess capacity is needed at any given time to meet needs while the next increment of expansion is designed and constructed. Such capacity could be used up and not replaced. A key sub-question in this subject is whether lack of capacity in municipal land area or systems would cause people to stop seeking to come to the Gallatin Valley. The residents of the City of Bozeman have for many decades been between 45-50% of the total county population. Since such a large fraction of the county population has chosen to locate outside of the city limits it is highly likely that growth would continue but would locate within the 81 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 28 of 31 unincorporated areas or other municipalities. The factors identified above that draw people to the area would be unlikely to be changed by a City decision to restrict development. Therefore, the character of the valley would continue to change but without material influence from the City. As the population and development of the Gallatin Valley has occurred the degree of interdependence has increased. As shown in this image from the US Census Bureau application OnTheMap, the economy relies substantially on persons living outside of the city to work at jobs located in the city. Data from 2017, the most recent available, shows a total of 33,879 jobs in the City. Of that number only 13,667 were serviced by City residents. The number of City residents leaving the City for employment was 9,874 and the number of non- City residents coming into the City for work was 20,212. A key outcome of this situation is that tens of thousands of people are commuting every day into the City and consuming street capacity, police and fire services, and other municipal services. However, the property taxes they pay on their homes does not come to the City to offset those demands for service. On a national level, the supply of housing is not keeping up with demand for housing. On a local level, this issue was examined by the 2019 Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) for the City. A similar effort is being conducted at this time by Gallatin County for areas outside of 82 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 29 of 31 the City. The HNA identified a deficiency of available housing as a strong contributor to housing price escalation in the area. Housing prices, both nationally and locally, have increased substantially faster than incomes. Housing scarcity is a substantial concern and impacts the ability of businesses to hire workers. As local unemployment has been low for many years, attraction of new employees is dependent on the availability of additional housing in the area. As discussed above, the majority of the Planning Area is outside of the City limits. The City of Bozeman and Gallatin County have worked together to encourage annexation and development within the City limits. Development within the City is more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. As discussed briefly under Criterion 6 in Section 3 of this report, urban intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban development. Comparing suburban development with an average density of one home per 1.25 acres and rural at one home per 5.5 acres to the more intensive apartment style development of One 11 Lamme; the suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home. Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of conversion of agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some land with annexation. Municipal development enables use of highly effective centralized water and sewer systems. Such centralized systems are more protective of water quality both at the surface and underground. Areas such as the Helena Valley in Lewis and Clark County are experiencing problems with ground water contamination resulting from significant use of on-site water and sewer systems. Gallatin County has been a good partner in encouraging potential development to annex and develop within the City. However, if the City is unable or unwilling to annex and provide services the County will not prohibit development on that parcel. As shown on the context map, there has been considerable rural and suburban development within the Planning Area. If so, how? In many planning efforts and discussions over the years, the Planning Board and City Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP approaches growth as something that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that the community will change over time. 83 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 30 of 31 The City has adopted land development regulations and policies to reasonably mitigate negative impacts. These have been adopted to address the question of “If so, how.” Those regulations can do many things to ensure adequate physical facilities and a visually appealing and functional development of sites. They support expansion of employment and tax base for the community. They ensure provision of new parks and walking trails, keep the water flowing if there is a home fire to be put out, and provide a framework within which people may pursue dreams of their own homes and businesses. For all they can accomplish, there are some things they cannot do. They cannot make there be fewer people on a favorite walking trail, make certain you see people you know as you walk down the street, or control things that happen outside of the City limits. They don’t set school service boundaries; or change the floodplain or water quality or wetland standards established by federal and state agencies. They can’t prevent your mortage lender or landlord from being sneaky or deceitful or assure that buying a house will work out well for you. They can’t change the flight path of aircraft headed to the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport. They cannot assure you of a neighbor you want to have. They don’t change any state or federal policy. They do not prevent change or guarantee that change will happen in the way any particular person prefers. FISCAL EFFECTS No funds have been budgeted at this time for implementation of the plan. Creation and review of the new growth policy was funded by the City Commission from long range planning funds over several fiscal years. Expenditures for the growth policy are within the budgeted funds. ATTACHMENTS The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715. Resolution 5133 Proposed October 20, 2020 draft growth policy main text Proposed October 20, 2020 growth policy supporting appendices Proposed October 20, 2020 future land use map – large format List of edits in the October 20, 2020 draft growth policy List of potential additional edits for the October 20, 2020 draft growth policy Map of potential areas for Maker Space Mixed Use – Staff recommendations Summary of public comments received after Planning Board action on August 10, 2020 Updated Growth policy update context map Planning Board Resolution 20-1 Planning Board Resolution 20-1 Appendix A 84 16-521, Updated City Commission Staff Report for adoption of a new growth policy in 2020. Page 31 of 31 Vacant property map City limits and planning area map as of 10/30/2020 2018 report by Economic Planning Systems (link only) Table showing where each required element has been met in the growth policy 85 Resolution No. 5133 Adopting Updated Growth Policy Page 1 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 5133 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA, ADOPTING THE BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN 2020 AS THE CITY’S GROWTH POLICY AND REPEALING ALL PRIOR GROWTH POLICIES. WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman has had a comprehensive plan (growth policy) since 1958; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman adopted its growth policy known as the Bozeman Community Plan through Resolution 4163 on June 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, 76-1-601 MCA requires a periodic review and, when appropriate, update to a growth policy; and WHEREAS, the City Commission requested the Planning Board to prepare an update to the City’s growth policy; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2017, the City contracted with Economic Planning Systems and LoganSimpson to assist in collection of data, projection of trends, and preparation of the update to growth policy; and WHEREAS, beginning in 2017, the Planning Board began extensive outreach and communication with the community soliciting input and comment on the update to growth policy; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board conducted public hearings on the draft document on July 21, 2020, July 28, 2020, and August 10, 2020; and WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board has transmitted their recommendation and a draft document to the City Commission through Planning Board Resolution 20-1; and 86 Resolution No. 5133 Adopting Updated Growth Policy Page 2 of 4 WHEREAS, on August 25, 2020, the City Commission passed Resolution 5132 stating their intent to consider adoption of a new growth policy; and WHEREAS, in accordance with 76-1-602, MCA, the City Commission must conduct a public hearing prior to taking any action to adopt or revise a growth policy; and WHEREAS, the City Commission conducted public hearings on the draft document on October 6, 2020 and October 20, 2020 and after hearing from the public and considering public comments directed revisions to the draft document; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, that: Section 1 The City Commission approves Resolution 5133 adopting the attached text and future land use map of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 as the City’s growth policy. Section 2 That the growth policy adopted by Resolution 4163 and all subsequent amendments is hereby repealed. Section 3 All adopted Neighborhood Plans remain in effect. Section 4 The City Commission requests the City Manager to prepare an implementation plan to undertake the implementation of the recommendations and policies of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The City Manager shall provide recommendations for timing of work, budget, and staff time commitments to complete the implementation plan. 87 Resolution No. 5133 Adopting Updated Growth Policy Page 3 of 4 Section 5 The City Commission requests the City Manager to develop the tracking indicators in Chapter 4 of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The City Commission acknowledges that the details of implementation of the tracking indicators are subject to adjustment due to data availability and targets if established by the City Commission. Section 6 The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 is to be available on the City’s website with updates to the published document made as needed to maintain hyperlinks and update names of other documents referenced in the online version as the various documents mentioned within the document are updated. Such updates shall not modify the text other than the names and hyperlinks to other documents. Such updates shall not modify the text or hyperlinks in Appendix B. 88 Resolution No. 5133 Adopting Updated Growth Policy Page 4 of 4 Section 7 PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman, Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 17th day of November. The effective date of this Resolution is November 19, 2020. DATED this 17th day of November. ___________________________________ CINDY ANDRUS Mayor ATTEST: ________________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney 89 BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN CITY COMMISSION DRAFT 20 OCTOBER 2020 90 II BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 91 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 I BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION _________________________ Mayor Cyndy Andrus Deputy Mayor Terry Cunningham Commissioner Jennifer Madgic Commissioner I-Ho Pomeroy Commissioner Michael Wallner BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD Henry (Hap) Happel, President Cathy Costakis Mark Egge Jennifer Madgic, Commission Member Gerald (Jerry) Pape, Jr. Richard Rudnicki Paul Spitler George Thompson SIGNATURE PAGE This certifies that the Bozeman Community Plan has been duly adopted by the Bozeman City Commission by City of Bozeman Resolution No. 5133, dated ___________. 92 II BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN ACKNOWLEDGMENTS CITY OF BOZEMAN CITY COMMISSION MAYOR CYNDY ANDRUS DEPUTY MAYOR TERRY CUNNINGHAM COMMISSIONER JENNIFER MADGIC COMMISSIONER I-HO POMEROY COMMISSIONER MICHAEL WALLNER COMMISSIONER JEFF KRAUSS, PAST MEMBER COMMISSIONER CHRIS MEHL, PAST MEMBER CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD HENRY (HAP) HAPPEL, CHAIR CATHY COSTAKIS MARK EGGE JENNIFER MADGIC, COMMISSION MEMBER GERALD (JERRY) PAPE, JR. RICHARD RUDNICKI PAUL SPITLER GEORGE THOMPSON BRIANNE DUGAN, PAST MEMBER JOHN LAVEY, PAST MEMBER CHRIS MEHL, PAST COMMISSION MEMBER LAUREN WATERTON, PAST MEMBER JORDAN ZIGNEGO, PAST MEMBER CITY OF BOZEMAN STAFF MARTIN MATSEN, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CHRIS SAUNDERS, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MANAGER TOM ROGERS, SENIOR PLANNER SARAH ROSENBERG, ASSOCIATE PLANNER CITY OF BOZEMAN GIS DIVISION CONSULTANT TEAM LOGAN SIMPSON LELAND CONSULTING SPECIAL THANKS TO THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE PROCESS AND CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY PLAN. 93 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 III CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 01 | BASICS 3 ORGANIZATION 3 PLANNING AREA 5 PLANNING TIME HORIZON 6 PUBLIC OUTREACH 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS 7 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS 9 BASIC PLANNING PRECEPTS 10 02 | THEMES 13 THEME 1 | A RESILIENT CITY 14 THEME 2 | A CITY OF UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS 16 THEME 3 | A CITY BOLSTERED BY DOWNTOWN AND COMPLEMENTARY DISTRICTS 20 THEME 4 | A CITY INFLUENCED BY OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, PARKS, AND OPEN LANDS 24 THEME 5 | A CITY THAT PRIORITIZES ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY CHOICES 28 THEME 6 | A CITY POWERED BY ITS CREATIVE, INNOVATIVE, AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY 32 THEME 7 | A CITY ENGAGED IN REGIONAL COORDINATION 35 03 | FUTURE LAND USE 39 IMPORTANCE 39 FUTURE LAND USE MAP - LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS 41 CORRELATION WITH ZONING 46 THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP 47 04 | IMPLEMENTATION 49 IMPORTANCE 49 SHORT-TERM ACTION LIST 50 MONITORING AND UPDATES 50 05 | AMENDMENTS + REVIEW 53 PLAN AMENDMENTS 53 REVIEW TRIGGERS, AMENDMENTS, AND AMENDMENT CRITERIA 54 SUBDIVISION REVIEW 56 ZONING AMENDMENT REVIEW 60 06 | APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT AND PROCESS TO CREATE THE PLAN APPENDIX B: INFRASTRUCTURE AND SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS APPENDIX C: INVENTORY REPORT – HISTORY AND CURRENT CONDITIONS APPENDIX D: PROJECTIONS REPORT – TRENDS APPENDIX E: INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN PER 76-1-601(4)(C)MCA APPENDIX F: GLOSSARY 94 Iv BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 95 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 1 INTRODUCTION 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 (refer to Appendices C and D for additional information on population). 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 tens of 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. This Plan helps guide residents, City staff, and elected officials’ decisions. It brings land use policy into larger community discussions on many issues addressed by the City. Its measure of success is continuation of the Bozeman tradition— a flourishing, safe, healthy, and a vibrant place to live, work, 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 residents and businesses in the City, through their aspirations and hard work, will carry out the Plan. 96 2 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 97 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 3 01 01 | BASICS ORGANIZATION The Plan is organized into five main sections: Basics, Themes, Land Use Map, Implementation, and Amendments + Review. Appendices provide additional details. 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, this section describes the basic planning principles employed in developing the Plan. Recommendations are discussed within the context of the issues most important to Bozeman residents. 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. 03 | Future Land Use sets forth and discusses Bozeman’s Future Land Use Map. 04 | Implementation details a monitoring program that will be used to track progress toward meeting the community’s vision. 05 | Amendments + Review contains information concerning amendment of the Plan, and the principles involved in the City’s subdivision and zoning review processes. 98 4 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN APPENDICES APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT AND PROCESS TO CREATE THE PLAN Appendix A details the outreach and engagement process that helped shape the Community Plan. The four-phase process used in-person and digital approaches to engagement to capture the community’s voice. APPENDIX B: INFRASTRUCTURE AND SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS Appendix B references the City’s key infrastructure plans and special topic plans, with descriptions of, and links to each plan document. Included are future and existing plans for transportation, storm water, wastewater, parks and open lands, public safety, economic development, housing, neighborhood plans, and other topics. APPENDIX C: INVENTORY REPORT – HISTORY AND CURRENT CONDITIONS Appendix C details the history of the City of Bozeman, along with a description of existing conditions. 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). APPENDIX D: PROJECTIONS REPORT – TRENDS The projections shown in Appendix D have been extracted from the EPS report. Projections include population, employment, and housing growth, and demand projections for land, housing, and commercial and industrial space. APPENDIX E: INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN PER 76-1-601(4)(C) MCA The law authorizing growth policies allows additional items to be added to a growth policy. The table in this Appendix identifies how infrastructure is expanded, the consequences of that expansion, and how negative effects of the expansion can be mitigated. APPENDIX F: GLOSSARY Defines specific terms used in the Plan. 99 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 100 6 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN PLANNING AREA Bozeman’s Planning Area is generally the area of the City’s future municipal water and sewer service boundary. It includes the City of Bozeman as well as a half-mile to two-mile area around the City in the Gallatin County jurisdictional area. The Planning Area is nearly 70.8 square miles. The City’s current footprint is 20.9 square miles. Much of the area within the planning area and outside of the City has already been developed. This Plan encourages development within the municipal boundaries where City services are available. Thoughtful development in the Planning Area is guided by the Plan’s goals and policies. 101 IN T E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE COTTONWOOD RD S 3RD AVE FR O N T A G E R D DURSTON RD GOOCHHILLRDHUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE W M A IN ST E VALLEY CENTER RD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST DAVIS LN B R I D GER CANYONRD WCOLLEGE ST E MAINSTN ROUSE AVE B R I D GER DR SWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD GOLDENSTEIN LN FRONT A G E R D City of Bozeman Planning Area 0 2 41Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´ Growth Policy Boundary City Limits CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 7 City of Bozeman Current City Limits (in grey shade) and Growth Policy Boundary (in green) 102 - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 1870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990199520002005201020152020BBoozzeemmaann PPooppuullaattiioonn 8 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN PLANNING TIME HORIZON The time horizon for this Plan is 20 years—until 2040. This time horizon is referred to in the Plan as the “Planning Period.” 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 is not predicted to occur over any particular timeframe. TO GROW OR NOT TO GROW? IF SO, HOW? Bozeman has seen nearly continuous growth since its founding. The population of the City has expanded by 275% over the past 50 years. Many factors, including but not limited to: nearby extensive outdoor recreation opportunities, Montana State University, people who left the area for careers returning, changing technology enabling remote work, and people becoming familiar with the area during visits to Yellowstone National Park influence the decisions of individuals and businesses to move to Bozeman and the Gallatin Valley. Developing factors that appear to be increasing interest in the local area include climate change, increasing economic opportunities in the local area with technology and other sector growth, and recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. The increasing number of people and associated impacts cause changes in the community. Those changes stimulate an examination of whether the City should continue to grow or if it should try to “put on the brakes” by attempting to constrain growth in some manner. Such a question reflects the deep concerns of people in many areas and issues. 103 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 9 Diverse changes have caused increases in number of homes and expanding areas of development. As household sizes have decreased over time additional houses are required to serve the same population. The number of homes in Bozeman required to house the same 10,000 people increased 47.8% between 1970 and 2010. That increased number of homes requires more streets, water and sewer pipes, and similar expanded municipal and private facilities. The cost of services per person correspondingly increases. Should this household size trend reverse, the City could see large population increases without construction of additional homes. Such shifts in demographics are difficult to predict. Bozeman has expanded in population and land area from in- migration, change in the demographic makeup of the community, new births, and annexation of new areas to serve new or existing residents. Community change is dynamic and affected by many forces. It is also inevitable. Even if population stayed the same, there are forces that make outward and inward changes in a community. CONTEXT OF THE GROWTH QUESTION Consideration of Bozeman’s growth cannot be separated from the larger context of the Gallatin Valley. Bozeman has been 45-50% of the county population over time. When people discuss growth in Bozeman they are often thinking of more than just the legal boundaries of the City. Rapid growth has also been happening in other valley municipalities and the unincorporated areas of the County. 104 10 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN The Planning Area for the BCP is approximately 70 square miles. Most of that area lies outside of the existing municipal limits. However, it is not free from development pressure or change. As shown on the map on the next page, much of the land within the Planning Area and outside the City has already been subdivided and developed to some degree, mostly as suburban and rural housing. Only 8% of all the parcels in the nearly 49 square miles outside of the City limits are larger than 20 acres. Twenty acres is the minimum area generally considered eligible to be classified as agricultural property. This parcel pattern reflects many decades of land use decisions by private property owners as well as various governmental agencies. The Planning Area outside of the City’s legal limits remains under the final authority of Gallatin County. The County and City do not have a shared planning board or regulations at this time. As described in Chapter 2, Theme 7 the City works with Gallatin County on land use planning issues. However, should a land owner outside of the City ask to change zoning or subdivide land the County Commission has the final decision. The City’s regulations only apply within its legal limits. Areas that people often describe as being in Bozeman such as the Woodland Park and Middle Creek developments along Huffine Lane are outside of the City limits and were approved by the County. 105 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 11 IN T E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE FR O N T A G E R D COTTONWOOD RD S 3RD AVE DURSTON RD GOOCHHILLRDHUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE WM A I N ST E VALLEY CENTER RD S P RI NGHI LLRDW BABCOCK ST W OAK ST DAVIS LN B R I D GER CANYONRD W COLLEGE ST E MAINSTN ROUSE AVE B R I D GER DR SWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD GOLDENSTEIN LN FRONT A G E R D Bozeman Community Plan 2020 Context Map 0 2 41Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´City Limits Growth Policy Boundary Conservation Easements Government & Education Agencies Parcels Up to Twenty Acres City of Bozeman Context Map dsiplaying development inside Growth Policy Boundary 106 12 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN DOES THE CITY HAVE TO GROW? The City is not required to grow in area or population. The undeveloped areas in town would eventually fill in with development. The City could choose to not annex new property. The City could stop acquiring water rights, stop expanding treatment capacity for water or sewer, or could strictly limit development opportunities through regulations on development intensity or rate. All of these would result in fewer homes and businesses than would otherwise be present. There is additional capacity presently in the City’s systems due to planned “working room” to account for the fact that expansion of capacity often comes in large increments and therefore some excess capacity is needed at any given time to meet needs while the next increment of expansion is designed and constructed. Such capacity could be used up and not replaced. A key sub-question and consequence in this subject is whether lack of capacity in municipal land area or systems would cause people to stop seeking to come to the Gallatin Valley. The residents of the City of Bozeman have for many decades been between 40-50% of the total county population. Since half or more of the county population has chosen to locate outside of the Bozeman limits it is highly likely that growth would continue but would locate outside the City within the unincorporated areas or other municipalities. The factors that draw people to the area would be unlikely to be changed by a City decision to restrict development. Therefore, the character of the valley, including areas adjacent to Bozeman, would continue to change but without material influence from the City. Certain US cities and towns have attempted to artificially constrain growth by limiting annual growth percentages, limiting building permits, establishing greenbelt buffers, building height restrictions, etc. Generally speaking, such artificial growth limits tend to redistribute future growth outside city boundaries, drive up housing prices and rental costs, increase commuting times, and limit employment opportunities within city boundaries. As the population and development of the Gallatin Valley has occurred the degree of interdependence has increased. The Bozeman economy relies substantially on persons living outside of the city to work at jobs located in the city. Census Data from 2017, the most recent available, shows a total of 33,879 jobs in the City. Of that number 13,667 were serviced by City residents. The number of City residents leaving the City for employment was 9,874 and the number of non-City residents coming into the City for work was 20,212. A key outcome of this situation is that tens of thousands of people are commuting every day into the City and consuming street capacity, police and fire services, and other municipal services. However, revenue generated by their homes does not come to the City to offset those demands for service. On a national level, the supply of housing is not keeping up with demand for housing. On a local level, this issue was examined by the 2019 Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) for the City. A similar effort is being conducted at this time by Gallatin County for areas outside of the City. The HNA identified a deficiency of available housing 107 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 13 as a strong contributor to housing price escalation in the area. Housing prices, both nationally and locally, have increased substantially faster than incomes. Housing scarcity is a substantial concern and impacts the ability of businesses to hire workers. As local unemployment has been low for many years, attraction of new employees is dependent on the availability of additional housing in the area. As discussed above, the majority of the Planning Area is outside of the City limits. The City of Bozeman and Gallatin County have worked together to encourage annexation and development within the City limits. Development within the City is more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. Urban intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban development. Comparing suburban development with an average density of one home per 1.25 acres and rural at one home per 5.5 acres to the more intensive apartment style development of a recent project downtown; the suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home. Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of conversion of agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some land with annexation. Municipal development enables use of highly effective centralized water and sewer systems. Such centralized systems are more protective of water quality both at the surface and underground. Areas such as the Helena Valley in Lewis and Clark County are experiencing problems with ground water contamination resulting from significant use of on-site water and sewer systems. Gallatin County has been a good partner in encouraging potential development to annex and develop within the City. The current and proposed County growth policies and the Triangle Community Plan support such action. However, if the City is unable or unwilling to annex and provide services the County will not prohibit development on that parcel. As shown on the context map, there has been considerable rural and suburban development within the Planning Area. IF WE GROW, HOW? In many planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP approaches growth as 108 14 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN something that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that the community will change over time. The City has adopted land development regulations and policies to reasonably mitigate negative impacts. These have been adopted to address the question of “If so, how.” Regulations can do many things to ensure adequate physical facilities and a visually appealing and functional development of sites. They support expansion of employment and tax base for the community. They ensure provision of new parks and walking trails, keep the water flowing if there is a home fire to be put out, and provide a framework within which people may pursue dreams of their own homes and businesses. For all they can accomplish, there are some things they cannot do. They cannot make there be fewer people on a favorite walking trail, make certain you see people you know as you walk down the street, or control things that happen outside of the City limits. They don’t set school service boundaries; or change the floodplain or water quality or wetland standards established by federal and state agencies. They can’t assure that buying a house will work out well for you. They can’t change the flight path of aircraft headed to the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport. They cannot assure you of a neighbor you want to have. They don’t change any state or federal policy. They do not prevent change or guarantee that change will happen in the way any particular person prefers. MITIGATING IMPACTS For new people and businesses to come and establish in the community the City must be able to provide land area, utility services, and other functions. It is the long standing policy of the City to balance the interests of new and existing residents. Therefore, the City has established standards and procedures to strive to ensure that new development proportionately contributes to the services and facilities needed to support new development. The following examples identify significant policies but it is not an exhaustive list. • Annexation: Annexation is almost entirely initiated by the landowner. The City has limited ability to start an annexation process. Annexation is often motivated by a desire to develop property or to address a failed on- site septic system. At the time of annexation, land owners commit to provide or do provide easements for major roadways, and to follow the City’s land development standards requiring the landowner to provide needed infrastructure for development of the land. • Water Rights: All water in the state not reserved to the Federal Government or Tribal Government is controlled by the State of Montana. No one can use water without the State’s permission. Such permission is called a water right. When new development occurs, the City requires that new development to provide either water rights to the City or to pay an equal amount of money so the City can acquire water rights adequate to serve the 109 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 15 new development. Existing water users are not required to pay for water rights for new development. • Impact Fees: Impact fees are costs charged to new development to construct fire, water, sewer, and transportation facilities to support new development. There are strict rules to ensure that the impact fees don’t fix existing problems. Impact fees enable the City to more closely keep up with water and sewer treatment capacity and other infrastructure needed for new development to be functional and safe. • Utility planning: The City conducts long range planning for water, sewer, transportation, parks, and other services. This planning work examines the needs for existing users and future users. This enables the City to construct facilities before big bottlenecks occur. Since a water line can have a service life of at least 70 years, sizing them correctly is a significant concern to avoid future service limits and failures. Knowing what services are needed enables the City to work effectively and cost efficiently to serve existing and future users. Recent expansion and upgrades at the City’s water and sewer treatment facilities were required both for maintaining legal compliance with treatment standards for existing users and to enable new users. • Regulations: The City adopts standards for development to correlate timing of new development with the services needed to serve it. This protects the public health and safety. The regulations also provide predictability in decision making to both existing and new members of the community. Predictability is a very important element in the complex and difficult public and private decisions relating to growth. 110 16 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN PUBLIC OUTREACH Developing Bozeman’s Community Plan involved a lengthy public outreach period. The Planning Board and City Commission provided guidance throughout the process. Development of the Plan included four distinct phases. The community was provided many opportunities throughout the process to voice their opinion including large-scale community events, small group listening sessions, stakeholder interviews, and a series of progressive, easy-to-use online surveys. Events were advertised through print and social media, as well as on the City’s website and calendar. Additionally, postcards and flyers were handed out and posted throughout the community to encourage high levels of participation and to increase overall awareness. Appendix A details the City and its residents’ process to develop this Plan. EXISTING CONDITIONS POPULATION Bozeman’s estimated 2018 population (48,105) was more than double the City’s population in 1990 (22,660). The median age of Bozeman residents is 27.9 years old, which can partially be attributed to the enrollment of over 16,900 students at Montana State University. Over 55 percent of residents have a bachelor’s degree or higher, in comparison to the national average of 30 percent. The City is projected to grow by nearly 27,000 people through the year 2045. Net migration accounted for 75 percent of Gallatin County’s population change between 2010 and 2017. A high rate of net migration indicates that an area is a desirable place to live and is a sign of a thriving economy. EMPLOYMENT Bozeman’s largest employer is Montana State University (MSU), with over 3,000 full and part-time employees. Gallatin County has experienced an employment growth rate of over four percent per year since 2010—adding 12,000 jobs. Eighty percent of this growth occurred in the City of Bozeman. For the Love of Bozeman FOUNDATION Project Branding One-on-One Interviews Listening Sessions Community Social + Questionnaire Bozeman Talks ANALYSIS + VISION Existing Plans Review Existing Conditions Analysis Community values Identification Community Workshop + Questionnaire Bozeman Thinks Big OPPORTUNITIES + CHOICES Opportunities Identification Land Use Options Development + Refinement Community Events + Open House Bozeman The Plan PLAN DEVELOPMENT + APPROVAL Draft Plan Development Community Open Houses + Questionnaire Draft Plan Review Final Plan Development Formal Adoption Hearings Community Plan Process and Outreach, 2018 - 2020 111 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 17 INCOME The median household income in Bozeman is $49,217; however, the Bozeman median household income is $79,662 for homeowners and $35,012 for renters. This disparity may reflect, to some extent, the impact of MSU students on Bozeman statistical averages. HOUSING Figures in this section are from the 2019 Housing Needs Assessment performed after the EPS report was completed. About 45 percent of households in the City own their homes, up from 43.5 percent in 2010. The median sale price of homes, including single-detached homes, townhomes, and condominiums, was $385,000 in 2018, an increase of 75 percent since 2012. During this same period, the consumer price index rose 10 percent and the cost of homes nationwide rose 38 percent. According to the American Community Survey there are 18,539 total households in Bozeman. Twenty-four percent of homeowners are “cost burdened”, which means they are paying 30 percent or more of their income towards mortgage payments. Fifty-five percent of renters in Bozeman are cost-burdened. In the United States as a whole, 22.5 percent of homeowners were cost-burdened in 2017, the last year statistics are available. Between 2010 and the fall of 2018, 43 percent of homes built were multi-unit (3+), 41 percent were single-detached, 14 percent were townhomes and duplexes, and two percent were accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Forty-one percent of homes in Bozeman are single-detached, compared to nearly 70 percent in Montana and 62 percent nationally. There is an estimated demand for over 12,700 new residences in Bozeman by the year 2045 to compensate for current shortfall in housing stock and the projected population increase. TRANSPORTATION Bozeman residents have access to a range of transportation options, including an extensive sidewalk and trail system, the six citywide routes offered by Streamline Bus service, Skyline Bus service to Big Sky, Galavan transportation service for seniors and people with disabilities, taxi service and rideshare, and the bike network, which consists of 18 miles of bike routes, 33 miles of bike lanes, and 23 miles of shared-use paths Seventy percent of Bozeman commuters drive alone, 16 percent walk or ride a bike, six percent work from home, and less than one percent use public transit. The average commute time, which has been increasing, is approximately 14.5 minutes, compared to the state average of 18 minutes and the national average of 26 minutes. GROWTH Bozeman’s land area and its population is growing. Since 1988, Bozeman has annexed, at landowners’ request, more than 6,650 acres of land, about 10.3 square miles– more than doubling its size. The projected land demand over the Planning Period, based on estimated population growth, 112 18 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN ranges from 3,820 acres to 5,716 acres, depending largely on levels of density in future residential developments. Faster rates of population growth will require additional land area. A more detailed description of Bozeman’s existing conditions can be found in Appendix C. For complete details on projections, see Appendix D. COMPARISON TO OTHER CITIES Table 2 below presents descriptive statistics of Bozeman compared to five other communities around the West. Table 2. Comparison to Other Cities City Median HouseHold inCoMe (aCs,2018) Median Housing PriCe (Zillow, 2019) Median House PriCe to Median inCoMe ratio PoPulation (aCs, 2019) City land area (sq. Miles) PoP. / sq. Mile growtH % 2010 - 2019 (aCs, 2019) annualiZed growtH rate (2010 - 2019) Persons in Poverty, % (2019) Bend, OR $63,468 $443,400 7.0 100,421 33.3 3016 31% 3.1% 10.3% Billings, MT $57,172 $243,700 4.3 109,557 43.5 2519 5.1% 0.5% 10.2% Boulder, CO $66,117 $793,578 12.0 107,673 25.7 4190 8.3% 0.8% 21.3% BoZeMan, Mt $51,896 $440,200 8.5 49,831 20.9 2384 33.7% 3.3% 18.6% Fort Collins, CO $62,132 $393,500 6.3 170,243 47.1 3615 17.5% 1.8% 16.8% Meridian, ID $68,131 $326,400 4.8 114,161 26.8 4260 48.3% 4.8% 8.8% Missoula, MT $45,010 $308,800 6.9 75,516 29.2604 12.1% 1.2% 18.3% Sources: (ACS, 2018 and 2019) U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5-Year Estimates. (Zillow 2019) Zillow.com, Accessed December 1, 2019. City Land Area: Wikipedia 113 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 19 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS 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 Plan primarily through its Vision Statement #4 entitled A Well-Planned City. This Vision Statement focuses on five goals listed in the table below. 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 seven Themes in this Plan further the goals of the Strategic Plan. Table 3. Strategic Plan Alignment a resilient Citya City of neigHBorHoodsa City Bolstered By downtown and CoMPleMentary distriCtsa City influenCed By our natural environMent, Parks, and oPen landsa City tHat PrioritiZes aCCessiBility and MoBilitya City Powered By its Creative, innovative, and entrePreneurial eConoMya City engaged in regional CoordinationCovered By otHer Plansfuture land use MaPstrategiC Plan vision stateMent | a well-Planned City 1 Informed Conversation on Growth • • • ••• 2 High Quality Urban Approach • • • • • • • • • 3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices • • • • • • • • • 4 vibrant Downtown, Districts & Centers • •• • • • • 5 Housing and Transportation Choices • • ••• • • The Themes reflect community priorities in prior plans, demonstrating a level of consistency in community values over time. This Community Plan is also influenced by, and will influence, a number of other local plans, guidelines, policies, and manuals. These are intended to be used together to achieve a set of community goals while minimizing redundancies. They include the Transportation Master Plan, neighborhood plans such as the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan, and the City’s various water- related plans. See Appendix B for a more detailed description of individual plans. Given the City’s extensive operations, several plans are reviewed and updated each year. Please consult the most recent version of each plan. EXISTING PLANS Bozeman Creek Enhancement Plan – 2012 Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan – 2005 Climate Action Plan – 2020 Community Housing Action Plan - 2020 Community Transportation Safety Plan – 2013 Downtown Improvement Plan – 2019 Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan – 2016 Drought Management Plan – 2017 Economic Development Strategy Update – 2016 Fire and EMS Master Plan – 2017 Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation Plan and Community Wildfire Protection Plan – 2019 Housing Needs Assessment – 2019 Integrated Water Resources Implementation Plan – 2013 Integrated Water Resources Plan – 2013 Midtown Action Plan – 2017 Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) – 2019 Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan – 2007 Stormwater Facilities Plan – 2008 Stormwater Management Plan – 2019 Transportation Master Plan – 2017: Triangle Community Plan – 2020 Urban Forestry Management Plan – 2016 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update – 2015 Water Facility Plan Update – 2017 114 20 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN BASIC PLANNING PRECEPTS PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN THIS PLAN Drawing on best land use practices, community input, Bozeman’s land use planning experience, and the ideas discussed in the Themes, the City used the following principles to prepare the policies, goals, objectives, land use designations, and future land use map in this Plan: • The health and well-being of the public is an essential focus and influences and is influenced in turn by urban design and land development. • Urban design should integrate residential and commercial land use activities, multimodal transportation, and open spaces. • Variety in housing and employment opportunities are essential. • Land use designations must respond to a broad range of factors, including infrastructure, natural, and economic constraints, other community priorities, and expectations of all affected parties concerning private development. • Transportation infrastructure is vital in supporting desired land use patterns. Therefore, the two must be coordinated. Future infrastructure should favor interconnected multimodal transportation networks (i.e. infrastructure for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes of transport in addition to automobiles). • Diverse uses of land should occur relatively close to one another. • The City intends to create a healthy, safe, resilient, and sustainable community by incorporating a holistic approach to the design, construction, and operation of buildings, neighborhoods, and the City as a whole. Developments should contribute to these goals and be integrated into their neighborhood and the larger community. • The needs of new and existing development coexist and they should remain in balance; neither should overwhelm the other. • Infill development and redevelopment should be prioritized, but incremental compact outward growth is a necessary part of the City’s growth. • Gathering places and open spaces, including parks and trails, should be in convenient locations to those they serve. Quality and function is superior to quantity alone. The growth policy forms the foundation of the land development process. Subdivision/ Site Plan Apply development standards to a specific piece of property prior to physical construction Zoning Map Amendment Selection of a zoning district and associated development standards on one or more distinct properties Growth Policy Broad policy and coarse geographic detail dealing with multiple zoning districts 115 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 21 CITY RESPONSIBILITIES The City’s primary function is to provide a safe, healthy, and high-quality environment that supports the physical, social, and economic welfare of its residents. For the Bozeman community to continue to prosper, all residents need equitable access to opportunities to advance their well-being regardless of their circumstances. The way a community is shaped through development patterns, infrastructure, transportation systems, housing options, economic opportunities, and green spaces can contribute to the well-being of residents or can make it harder for people to live healthy and successful lives. COMMUNITY DESIRES People who have participated in this Plan have consistently stated a desire for safe and accessible streets that support and encourage a variety of transportation preferences including walking, bicycling, transit, and driving. They want to live in walkable neighborhoods where they have easy access to everyday services, employment opportunities, healthy and affordable food, recreation, and social gathering places. Housing affordability is a concern; residents of all ages, abilities, and income levels require a diversity of housing types to meet their specific needs. Open space, parks, trails, and the preservation of local agricultural lands and view sheds were also priorities. A description of public participation is presented in Appendix A. CITY’S ROLE Development occurs most efficiently, and with best results, when the public and private sectors work together to achieve mutually compatible goals. It is worth emphasizing that the vast majority of the future built environment will be designed, paid for, and constructed by the private sector. The City provides foundational work by providing infrastructure, public services, and implementing design standards to shape the fabric of the community. GROWTH Bozeman’s employment, population, and built environment have been growing rapidly. This has created community benefits including a strong local economy, increased diversity, and innovation. It has also led to growing pains—higher housing costs and increased traffic to name two. The City’s response to this is to pursue policies that mitigate these growing pains. These policies are described throughout this Plan. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY 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. Housing instability and homelessness a public health issues and are exacerbated by the rapid rise in housing prices. The positive attributes that make Bozeman a desirable place to live contributed to ever- increasing housing demand. Comparatively low wages have not increased at the same rate as housing costs. Home price increase exceeding wage increase is a national trend. The sale price of homes has more than fully recovered from the 2008 recession for all housing types. The median sale price of homes, including single-households, townhomes and condominiums, has increased 90% since 2012. This is an average increase of almost 12% per year. According to the most recent Bozeman Housing Needs Assessment, an estimated 5,405 to 6,340 housing units for residents and employees are needed by 2025, or an average of about 770 to 905 units per year. This figure includes housing for employees, units needed to open up the current tight rental and ownership markets, provides choice to households, housing for employees filling jobs vacated by retirees, workers filling new jobs, plus related non-employee citizen housing needs. Bozeman has taken the issue of housing seriously. It developed a housing needs assessment in 2019, hired a Community Housing Program Manager, 116 22 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN and released the Community Housing Action Plan (CHAP) in October 2019. The CHAP was updated in April 2020. At the time of publication, the availability of affordable housing, whether for rent or for purchase, is one of Bozeman’s most serious problems, as demonstrated by both the 2018 EPS Study and the CHAP. Mitigating this shortage is a top priority of the Bozeman City Commission, the Planning Board, and the Community Development Department, in conjunction with local and regional authorities. The three top action items in the Community Affordable Housing Action Plan are: • Ensuring community housing serves the full range of incomes without losing sight of safety net programs for extremely low income and homeless families. This includes safety net rentals below 30% AMI (about $20,000 per year), additional resident and employee rentals up to 80% AMI (about $55,000 per year), and ownership housing up to 150% AMI (about $104,000 per year). • Producing community housing at a rate that exceeds, or at least matches, job growth so that new employees can find homes. • Striving to produce community housing at a rate that matches the spectrum of community housing needs, while also preserving what we have through a target of no net loss of existing community housing stock below 80% AMI. The CHAP 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 housing, including affordability, is the subject of the detailed CHAP, this Plan does not address housing affordability issues in detail. For additional, up-to-date detail, see CAHAB and the Community Housing Action Plan. However, zoning and land use regulations are processes that influence the cost of housing and are addressed in this Plan. This Plan supports housing regulations that allow for a range of housing types intermixed with one another in a given neighborhood, denser development, and efficiencies of various types that can help reduce housing costs while not jeopardizing public safety and other community priorities. More housing, in a variety of type, size, and cost, is needed at prices that residents can afford. This will provide choices, the ability to move as life circumstances change, allows employers to fill jobs, recruit, and retain employees, supports businesses, and supports citizen and student growth. 117 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 23 02 02 | THEMES Seven Themes describe 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. The Themes are: A RESILIENT CITY; A CITY OF UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS; A CITY BOLSTERED BY DOWNTOWN AND COMPLEMENTARY DISTRICTS; A CITY INFLUENCED BY OUR NATURAL ENvIRONMENT, PARKS, AND OPEN LANDS; A CITY THAT PRIORITIZES ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY; A CITY POWERED BY ITS CREATIvE, INNOvATIvE, AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY; A CITY ENGAGED IN REGIONAL COORDINATION. 118 24 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN THEME 1 | A RESILIENT CITY 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, and 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. INFRASTRUCTURE WATERSHEDS & NATURAL RESOURCES COMMUNITY HEALTH & SOCIAL ECONOMIC HOUSING 119 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 25 During the development of the 2020 Community Plan, and at the time of publication, the world has been beset by the COVID Pandemic and the subsequent COVID Financial Crisis. The impacts of COVID reach into the trillions of dollars worldwide. Southwest Montana has fared better with COVID than most communities on a global scale. At the time of publication, it appears that this reduced initial COVID impact is creating significant in- migration of citizens to Bozeman and its environs. Mitigation of the impacts of both COVID and an influx of new citizens to our community will require unprecedented resilience, agility, and outside-the-box thinking, by all participants, the development community, including the City of Bozeman Commission and staff at all stages of the development process. THEME 1 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS 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 purposefully 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. 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 THEME 1: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Climate Vulnerability Assessment & Resiliency Strategy – 2019 Climate Action Plan – 2020 Community Transportation Safety Plan – 2013 Drought Management Plan – 2017 Economic Development Strategy Update – 2016 Fire and EMS Master Plan – 2017 Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation Plan and Community Wildfire Protection Plan – 2019 Housing Needs Assessment – 2019 Integrated Water Resources Implementation Plan – 2013 Integrated Water Resources Plan – 2013 Stormwater Management Plan – 2019 Transportation Master Plan – 2017 Urban Forestry Management Plan – 2016 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update – 2015 Water Facility Plan Update – 2017 120 26 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 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. R-2.5 Technical Soundness: Identify solutions that reflect best practices that have been tested and proven to work in similar local or regional contexts. R-2.6 Innovation: Advance new approaches and techniques that will encourage continual improvement and advancement of best practices. 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. 121 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 27 THEME 2 | A CITY OF UNIQUE NEIGHBORHOODS Our City desires to be diverse, healthy, and inclusive, defined by our vibrant neighborhoods, quality housing, walkability, excellent schools, numerous parks and trails, and thriving areas of commerce. IMPORTANCE Bozeman is indeed a city of unique neighborhoods. From the traditional neighborhoods north and south of Bozeman’s downtown, to the developments of more recent times, Bozeman’s neighborhoods are as diverse as the periods of time in which they were built. This eclectic mix of housing opportunities within differing geographic parts of town helps define who we are, where we came from, and where we’re going. Neighborhoods or communities that offer a mix of housing, needed services, and opportunities within close proximity of each other are considered “complete communities”. They promote walking or short commutes to the things in life we value and depend on including jobs, schools, places of worship, friends, goods and services, open spaces, trails, appropriately scaled urban agriculture such as community gardens, and more. Neighborhoods help improve community safety and overall community health. The City supports policies that maintain and build neighborhoods designed to provide equitable access to amenities and opportunities for all. Housing type diversity within neighborhoods helps ensure community benefits are available to households of different size, income, and age. Mixed neighborhoods can help provide the density of people needed to support nearby commercial activities. The need for a path to the emergence of small-scale neighborhood commercial development and its ability to bring pedestrian access to coffee shops, groceries, and other daily experiences, and related employment opportunities, is a critical part of Bozeman’s municipal maturation. 122 28 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN Neighborhood ElementsServices Parks and R e c r e a tio nJ obsSocial Netw or k s S e n s e o f Identity GeographySchoolsServices Homes123 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 29 Such a path is dependent on sufficient population density in such neighborhoods to make neighborhood commercial viable. Typically, this viability cannot be achieved co-emergently with construction of neighborhood housing—for this reason other subsidy approaches must be developed and deployed to make co-emergence possible. THEME 2 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS Goal N-1: Support well-planned, walkable neighborhoods. N-1.1 Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing. N-1.2 Increase required minimum densities in residential districts. N-1.3 Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively zoned for single-type housing. N-1.4 Promote development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) N-1.5 Encourage neighborhood focal point development with functions, activities, and facilities that can be sustained over time. Maintain standards for placement of community focal points and services within new development. N-1.6 Encourage urban agriculture as part of focal point development, in close proximity to schools, and near dense or multi-unit housing. N-1.7 Review and where appropriate, revise block and lot design standards, including orientation for solar power generation throughout city neighborhoods. N-1.8 Install, replace, and maintain missing or damaged sidewalks, trails, and shared use paths. N-1.9 Ensure multimodal connections between adjacent developments N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network. N-1.11 Enable a gradual and predictable increase in density in developed areas over time. N-1.12 Encourage major employers to provide employee housing within walking/biking distance of place of employment. Goal N-2: Pursue simultaneous emergence of commercial nodes and residential development through diverse mechanisms in appropriate locations. N-2.1 Ensure the zoning map identifies locations for THEME 2: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan – 2005 Downtown Improvement Plan – 2019 Housing Needs Assessment – 2019 Midtown Action Plan – 2017 Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) – 2019 Northeast Neighborhood Urban Renewal Plan – 2005 124 30 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN neighborhood and community commercial nodes early in the development process. N-2.2 Revise the zoning map to support higher intensity residential districts near schools, services, and transportation. N-2.3 Investigate and encourage development of commerce concurrent with, or soon after, residential development. Actions, staff, and budgetary resources relating to neighborhood commercial development should be given a high priority N-2.4 Evaluate design standards. Encourage development in appropriate districts of buildings that are capable of serving an initial residential purpose and be readily converted to commercial uses when adequate market support for commercial services exists. N-2.5 Ensure that new development includes opportunities for urban agriculture, including rooftop and home gardens, community gardens, or urban farms. Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units. N-3.1 Establish standards for provisions of diversity of housing types in a given area. N-3.2 Review zoning districts to assess the range of housing types in each district. N-3.3 Encourage distribution of affordable housing units throughout the City with priority given to locations near commercial, recreational, and transit assets. N-3.4 Require development of affordable housing through coordination of funding for affordable housing and infrastructure. N-3.5 Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to City land development policies or climate action plan goals. N-3.6 Include adequate residentially- designated areas for anticipated future housing in the future land use map. N-3.7 Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes, and small floor plans, especially through mechanisms such as density bonuses. N-3.8 Promote the development of "Missing Middle" housing (side by side or stacked duplex, triplex, live-work, cottage housing, group living, rowhouses/townhouses, etc.) as one of the most critical components of affordable housing. N-3.9 Ensure an adequate supply of appropriately designated land to accommodate Low Income Housing Tax Credit development in qualifying census tracts. Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place. N-4.1 Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs and policy led by both City and community efforts. N-4.2 Incorporate features, in both public and private projects, to provide organization, structure, and landmarks as Bozeman grows. N-4.3 Revise Design Guidelines within the Conservation Overlay District to distinguish Downtown from the residential neighborhoods, to encourage neighborhoods and neighborhoods near transition areas, both north and south of Downtown. N-4.4 Ensure an adequate supply of off- leash facilities to meet the demand of Bozeman dog owners. 125 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 31 THEME 3 | A CITY BOLSTERED BY DOWNTOWN AND COMPLEMENTARY DISTRICTS Our City is bolstered by our Downtown, Midtown, University and other commercial districts and neighborhood centers that are characterized by higher densities and intensities of use. IMPORTANCE Thoughtful city planning provides a host of advantages from economic vitality to environmental health to overall quality of life. Many of Bozeman’s neighborhoods have a concentration of housing with a variety of housing types that support nearby commercial centers. The City intends to look inward by prioritizing infill. Concentrated development uses land more efficiently, may reduce infrastructure costs, and reduces the overall amount of road surface and need for parking lots, improving overall access to parks, schools, and shops. Access is ultimately improved and places are connected through a variety of transportation options. Concentrated development makes sense for our pocketbooks and overall health. When it comes to promoting a walkable, bikeable, safe, affordable, and energy-efficient community, density and design matter. Preventing sprawl and increasing resource efficiency depend on an intensity of urban life found in our commercial centers. Innovative design and planning include ideas like pocket neighborhoods, smaller housing, green alleys, urban agriculture, and creativity in our public spaces. 126 Sources: ESRI, USGS, NOAA OAK HUFFINE MAIN KAGY7TH19THCOTTONWOODTo B e l g r a d e To Living s t o n HIGHLANDCHURCHBRIDGER ROUSEBAXTER VALLEY CENTER SPRINGHILLLakes Rivers City and Private Parks County Park Major Roads Local Roads Fowler District Downtown District Cottonwood District City Limits Baxter/Cattail District Midtown District Montana State University District North 19th District Story Mill DistrictBase LayersFramework Layers0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Ü Story Mill District N 19th Midtown District Downtown District Montana State University District Baxter/CattailDistrict Cottonwood District FowlerDistrict 32 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN This Diagram is for illustrative purposes, and is conceptual only. Complementary Districts 127 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 33 THEME 3 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City. DCD-1.1 Evaluate alternatives for more intensive development in proximity to high visibility corners, services, and parks. DCD-1.2 Remove regulatory barriers to infill. DCD-1.3 Work with state regulatory agencies and the legislature to remove disincentives in state law and regulations to municipal development. DCD-1.4 Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to reflect density increases or minimums within key districts. DCD-1.5 Identify underutilized sites, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible development or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development incentives. DCD-1.6 Investigate expansion of existing or creation of new urban renewal areas to encourage redevelopment of key properties. DCD-1.7 Coordinate infrastructure construction, maintenance, and upgrades to support infill development, reduce costs, and minimize disruption to the public. DCD-1.8 Collaborate with the Montana State University School of Architecture and the Sustainable Foods and Bioenergy Systems department to develop educational materials and opportunities for local architects, community planners, and citizens on how to do quality urban design for infill and greenfield sites. DCD-1.9 Promote mixed-use developments with access to parks, open space, and transit options. DCD-1.10 Support University efforts to attract development near campus. DCD-1.11 Pursue annexations consistent with the future land use map and adopted facility plans for development at urban intensity. DCD-1.12 Prioritize the acquisition and/or preservation of open space that supports community values, addresses gaps in functionality and needs, and does not impede development of the community. DCD-1.13 Pursue acquisition and development of diverse water sources and resources. Goal DCD-2: Encourage growth throughout the City, while enhancing the pattern of community development oriented on centers of employment and activity. Support an increase in development intensity within developed areas. DCD-2.1 Coordinate infrastructure development, land use development, and other City actions and priorities through community planning. DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses. DCD-2.3 Review and update minimum development intensity requirements in residential and non-residential zoning districts. DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts to account for contemporary building methods and building code changes. DCD-2.5 Identify and zone appropriate locations for neighborhood-scale commercial development. 128 34 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN DCD-2.6 Evaluate and pursue joint mitigation of development impacts across multiple developments. DCD-2.7 Encourage the location of higher density housing and public transit routes in proximity to one another. DCD-2.8 Revise the zoning ordinance, reducing the number of zoning districts to be more consistent with the designated land use classifications, to simplify the development process, and support affordability objectives of the plan. DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods. Goal DCD-3: Ensure multimodal connectivity within the City. DCD-3.1 Expand multimodal accessibility between districts and throughout the City as a means of promoting personal and environmental health, as well as reducing automobile dependency. DCD-3.2 Identify missing links in the multimodal system, prioritize those most beneficial to complete, and pursue funding for completion of those links. DCD-3.3 Identify major existing and future destinations for biking and walking to aid in prioritization of route planning and completion. DCD-3.4 Support implementation of the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan strategies. DCD-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. DCD-3.6 Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall transportation system for and between districts. Goal DCD-4: Implement a regulatory environment that supports the Community Plan goals. DCD-4.1 Ensure that the Planning Department is supported with the resources required to effectively implement this plan, to dedicate staff to long range and regional planning efforts, and to process development applications expeditiously. DCD-4.2 Continuously invite and give due consideration to the input of design and development professionals in the improvement of the city's project evaluation processes and development code. DCD-4.3 Complete the transition to a form-based code and simplification so that it can be understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff. DCD-4.4 Differentiate between development and redevelopment. Allow relaxations of code provisions for developed parcels to allow redevelopment to the full potential of their zoning district. THEME 3: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Downtown Improvement Plan – 2019 Integrated Water Resources Plan – 2013 Midtown Action Plan – 2017 129 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 35 THEME 4 | A CITY INFLUENCED BY OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT, PARKS, AND OPEN LANDS Our City is home to an outdoor-conscious population that honors and protects our natural environment and our well-managed open space and parks system. IMPORTANCE Surrounded by mountains, within close proximity to world-class rivers and Yellowstone National Park, Bozeman’s natural environment is hard to beat. It’s the foundation of our healthy tourist economy and the reason why many people move here, start businesses, and raise their families. It’s also the reason behind the City’s prioritization of parks, trails, and open space. And while Bozeman residents value and enjoy many forms of outdoor recreation, community members also understand and appreciate the need for maintaining and protecting the natural resources that support a healthy ecosystem. Protecting our immediate and regional ecosystem requires diligence and careful planning as Bozeman and Gallatin County continue to grow. Responding to climate change, protecting the health of our water systems and our air quality, and grappling with the impacts of increased human population and invasive plants and animals are some of our challenges. 130 Base LayersFramework Layersn n n n n n n n n n n n Sources: Esri, USGS, NOAA OAK HUFFINE MAIN KAGY7TH19THCOTTONWOOD Bozeman CreekEast Gall a t i n R i v e r Brid g e r R a n g e To B e l g r a d e To Living s t o n HIGHLANDCHURCHBRIDGER ROUSEBAXTER VALLEY CENTER SPRINGHILLLakes Rivers Trails City and Private Parks County Park n Schools Major Roads Local Roads City Limits 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Ü For additional information, please visit: https://gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=gvlt Peet’s Hill Park Snowfill Recreation Area Glen LakeRotary Park Kirk Park Bozeman Pond Gallatin CountyRegional Park Valley West Park 36 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN This Diagram is for illustrative purposes, and is conceptual only. Parks and Open Lands 131 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 37 THEME 4 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS Goal EPO-1: Prioritize strategic acquisition of parks to provide a variety of recreational opportunities throughout the City. EPO-1.1 Coordinate the location of existing and future parks to create opportunities for linear parks to connect larger parks. Prioritize quality locations and features in parks over quantity of parks. EPO-1.2 Collaborate with partner agencies and organizations to establish sustainable funding sources for ongoing acquisition, construction, and operations of City parks, trails, gardens, and open space. EPO-1.3 Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational and artistic elements into parks. EPO-1.4 Research and implement multi-use features within parks to promote increased use and visitation. Wherever possible, parks are connected to multi-modal transportation options and accessible for people with disabilities. EPO-1.5 Work with partner organizations to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk, environmentally sensitive areas that contribute to water quality, wildlife corridors, or wildlife habitat, specifically wildlife habitat as we continue outward growth. EPO-1.6 Upon completion of an update to the City’s park master plan, review standards of the UDC for adequacy and update, as needed, to coordinate with development review standards and practices. Goal EPO-2: Work to ensure that development is responsive to natural features. EPO-2.1 Where appropriate, activate connections to waterways by creating locations, adjacent trails, and amenities encouraging people to access them. EPO-2.2 Work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to keep wetlands mitigation within the Gallatin Valley rather than locating to other watersheds. EPO-2.3 Identify, prioritize, and preserve key wildlife habitat and corridors. Goal EPO-3: Address climate change in the City’s plans and operations. EPO-3.1 Support development of maintenance standards including sidewalk clearing, sidewalk surfaces, bike lanes, and procedures for consistent implementation. EPO-3.2 Ensure complete streets and identify long-term resources for the maintenance of year- round bike and multi-use paths to improve utilization and reduce annual per capita vehicle miles traveled. EPO-3.3 Support water conservation, use of native plants in landscaping, and development of water reuse systems. EPO-3.4 Review and update landscape and open space standards for public and private open spaces to reduce water use. Likewise, review and update standards for reuse systems. EPO-3.5 Update land development standards to implement the Integrated Water Resources Plan. EPO-3.6 Review and revise stormwater standards to address changing storm profiles. EPO-3.7 Review and update development regulations to implement facility and service plans when 132 38 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN those plans are updated. EPO-3.8 In coordination with the Sustainability Division, provide public education on energy conservation and diversified power generation alternatives. EPO-3.9 Integrate climate change considerations into development standards. EPO-3.10 Inclusion of community gardens, edible landscaping, and urban micro-farms as part of open spaces outside of watercourses and wetlands in subdivisions is encouraged where appropriate. EPO-3.11 Support resource conservation through recycling, composting, and other appropriate means. 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 regulations on economic viability. EPO-4.1 Eliminate reliance on private maintenance of public infrastructure, including public parks, trail systems, and stormwater facilities. Identify a sustainable and reliable public funding source for this infrastructure. EPO-4.2 Update floodplain and other regulations that protect the environment. EPO-4.3 Pursue an inter-jurisdictional effort to establish baseline information on air quality trends and enhance monitoring facilities. EPO-4.4 Collaborate with other Montana cities working with regulatory agencies to establish fair and technologically feasible water treatment standards. EPO-4.5 Complete the update for an integrated Hazard Management and Mitigation Plan. EPO-4.6 Develop a plan to mitigate conflicts between humans and wildlife through the use of proactive, non-lethal measures. THEME 4: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Bozeman Creek Enhancement Plan – 2012 Cemetery Master Plan - 2018 Climate Action Plan – 2020 Drought Management Plan – 2017 Integrated Water Resources Implementation Plan – 2013 Integrated Water Resources Plan – 2013 Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan – 2007 Stormwater Facilities Plan – 2008 Stormwater Management Plan – 2019 Transportation Master Plan – 2017: Urban Forestry Management Plan – 2016 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update – 2015 Water Facility Plan Update – 2017 133 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 39 THEME 5 | A CITY THAT PRIORITIZES ACCESSIBILITY AND MOBILITY CHOICES Our City fosters the close proximity of housing, services, and jobs, and desires to provide safe, efficient mobility for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users, and drivers. IMPORTANCE The best transportation plan is a good land use plan. Transportation systems impact the following: 1) livability (in terms of traffic congestion, but also noise, pollution, physical activity, accessibility, safety, and aesthetics); 2) affordability (after housing, transportation is the second largest expense for most households); and 3) sustainability (transportation accounted for more than one third of Bozeman’s 2016 greenhouse gas emissions). Notably, the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport is the busiest airport in the state. An affordable, livable, sustainable city should grow with reduced reliance on driving alone to reach daily destinations. Active transportation increases daily physical activity, improving health and lowering healthcare costs. Motor vehicle accidents are one of the leading causes of preventable deaths in our country. Designing streets to prioritize safety (rather than speed) significantly reduces fatal injuries for all users and promotes active transportation. Living in housing that’s far from daily destinations usually means the only reasonable transportation choice is your personal car. Thoughtful community planning provides residents and visitors with a wide range of transportation options. Appropriately designed trails, sidewalks, crossings, bike lanes, and transit networks help us move around our neighborhoods and promote safe, efficient passage to our destinations. 134 MSU Strand Union Downtown Transfer Gallatin Valley Mall n n n n n n n n n n n n Sources: ESRI, USGS, NOAA OAK HUFFINE MAIN KAGY7TH19THCOTTONWOOD Bozeman CreekEast Gall a t i n R i v e r Brid g e r R a n g e To B e l g r a d e To Living s t o n HIGHLANDCHURCHBRIDGER ROUSEBAXTER VALLEY CENTER SPRINGHILLLakes Rivers City and Private Parks County Park n Schools Major Roads Local Roads Bicycle Facilities City LimitsBase LayersFramework LayersMajor Streamline Hubs 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Ü For additional information, please visit: https://www.bozeman.net/visitors/bike-routes 40 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN This Diagram is for illustrative purposes, and is conceptual only. Accessibility and Mobility 135 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 41 THEME 5 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS Goal M-1: Ensure multimodal accessibility. 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. M-1.2 Make transportation investment decisions that recognize active transportation modes and transit as a priority. M-1.3 Develop service standard levels for multimodal travel. M-1.4 Develop safe, connected, and complementary transportation networks for pedestrians, bicyclists, and users of other personal mobility devices ( e-bikes, electric scooters, powered wheelchairs, etc.). M-1.5 Identify locations for key mobility hubs (e.g. rideshare drop off/ pick up areas, bike/scooter share, transit service, bike, and pedestrian connections). M-1.6 Integrate consideration of rideshare and other mobility choices into community planning regulations. M-1.7 Develop a trunk network of high-frequency, priority transit service connecting major commercial nodes and coinciding with increased density. M-1.8 Establish standards and procedures for placement of bus shelters in City rights of way. M-1.9 Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure, to include wayfinding signage, connections, and enhancements with emphasis on completing network connectivity. M-1.10 In conjunction with the transportation plan, work to develop a core network of “AAA” (appropriate for all ages and abilities) bike routes covering at least 75 percent of households and 75 percent of jobs within ½ mile of the network. M-1.11 Prioritize and construct key sidewalk connections and enhancements. M-1.12 Eliminate parking minimum requirements in commercial districts and affordable housing areas and reduce parking minimums elsewhere, acknowledging that demand for parking will still result in new supply being built. M-1.13 Work with community partners to expand the Main Street to the Mountains network and integrate the larger community recreational travel network. M-1.14 Identify possible routes for future bicycle and pedestrian beltway/greenway. Anticipating Changes in Multimodal Transportation OHM Advisors 136 42 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN Goal M-2: Ensure multimodal safety. M-2.1 Work with the Public Works Department, Police Department, and other partners to provide education on safe travel behaviors and rules. M-2.2 Review and, as appropriate, update the City’s complete streets policy. M-2.3 Work with School District #7 and other community partners in planning and operating safe routes to local schools. M-2.4 Encourage the design of school sites to support walking and biking. M-2.5 Develop safe crossings along priority and high utilization pedestrian and biking corridors. THEME 5: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Bozeman Community Transportation Safety Plan – 2013 Downtown Strategic Parking Management Plan – 2016 Transportation Master Plan – 2017 137 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 43 THEME 6 | A CITY POWERED BY ITS CREATIVE, INNOVATIVE, AND ENTREPRENEURIAL ECONOMY Our City benefits from and desires to further an expanding economy that is powered by the talents of its residents, a dedicated and engaged business community, and strong regional partnerships. IMPORTANCEBozeman’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. 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. 138 Base LayersFramework LayersMontana State University Bozeman Health Cannery District HotelBaxter Gallatin Valley Mall Sources: ESRI, USGS, NOAA Ferguson Farm OAK HUFFINE MAIN KAGY7TH19THCOTTONWOODTo B e l g r a d e To Living s t o n HIGHLANDCHURCHBRIDGER ROUSEBAXTER VALLEY CENTER SPRINGHILLLakes Rivers City and Private Parks County Park Major Roads Local Roads Northeast Neighborhood Urban Renewal District North Park Urban Renewal District Midtown Urban Renewal District Downtown Tax Increment District City Limits South Bozeman Technology District 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles Ü 44 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN This Diagram is for illustrative purposes, and is conceptual only. Financial and Economic Areas 139 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 45 THEME 6 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS Goal EE-1: Promote the continued development of Bozeman as an innovative and thriving economic center. EE-1.1 Support the goals and objectives outlined in the Bozeman Economic Development Strategy. EE-1.2 Invest in those infrastructure projects that will strengthen business and higher education communities as coordinated through the annual capital improvement plan. EE-1.3 Continue to facilitate live/work opportunities as a way to support small, local businesses in all zoning districts. EE-1.4 Support employee retention and attraction efforts by encouraging continued development of affordable housing in close proximity to large employers. EE-1.5 Support expansion of current and emerging infrastructure technologies including fiber optic service and other communication infrastructure. EE-1.6 Update the zoning map to correct deficiencies identified in the annual land use inventory report. Goal EE-2: Survey and revise land use planning and regulations to promote and support economic diversification efforts. EE-2.1 Ensure the future land use map contains adequate areas of land for anticipated diverse users. EE-2.2 Review and revise, or possibly replace, the Business Park Mixed Use zoning district to include urban standards and consider possible alterations to the allowed uses. EE-2.3 Adopt zoning regulations that establish and define the range of urban agricultural practices, including vertical farms and other forms of urban farming, as a permitted or conditional use in appropriate locations. Urban agriculture can be compatible with a variety of land use designations shown on the Future Land Use Map. THEME 6: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Economic Development Strategy Update – 2016 Transportation Master Plan – 2017 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update –2015 Water Facility Plan Update – 2017 140 46 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN THEME 7 | A CITY ENGAGED IN REGIONAL COORDINATION Our City, in partnership with Gallatin County, Montana State University, and other regional authorities, desires to address the needs of a rapidly growing and changing regional population through strategic infrastructure choices and coordinated decision-making. IMPORTANCE Cooperation between agencies makes sense. 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. 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 residents 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 helping define the 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 triangle, and 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. 141 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 47 This Diagram is for illustrative purposes, and is conceptual only. Regional Partners 142 48 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN Bozeman commits to Gallatin County and the City of Belgrade to work together in pursuit of these goals. The Planning Coordinating Committee will play a key role in coordinating this work. THEME 7 | GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS Goal RC-1: Improve communication and coordination with Gallatin County, the City of Belgrade, public schools, and other regional public entities regarding community planning and associated matters. RC-1.1 Consider regional impacts when making policy decisions affecting areas outside the City. RC-1.2 Coordinate planning activities to promote consistency throughout the region for parks, transportation, bus service, and other community infrastructure. RC-1.3 Research, understand, and collaboratively construct infrastructure and transportation improvements that benefit the region. 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. RC-1.5 Implement the Triangle Community Plan in coordination between Bozeman, Belgrade, and Gallatin County. 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. 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. RC-2.1 Prohibit development in environmentally-sensitive or hazard-prone areas. RC-2.2 Identify effective, affordable, and regionally-appropriate hazard mitigation techniques through the Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation and Community Wildfire Protection Plan and other tools. As a group, annually review the Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation Plan, and determine the need for updates and enhancements. RC-2.3 Along with non-profit and agency partners, identify, map, and utilize geographic information systems (GIS) data to locate and monitor developments on environmentally sensitive and hazard-prone areas. RC-2.4 Review and revise land use regulations and standards that affect the wildland urban interface to provide adequate public safety measures, mitigate impacts on public health, and encourage fiscal responsibility. RC-2.5 Through coordination with non-profit and agency partners, identify and prioritize lands for acquisition or placement of conservation easements with the goal of lessening or eliminating development in environmentally sensitive areas and/or preserving areas consistent with the other priorities of this Growth Policy. Goal RC-3: Collaborate with Gallatin County regarding annexation and development patterns adjacent to the City to provide certainty for landowners and taxpayers. RC-3.1 Work with Gallatin County to create compact, contiguous development and infill to achieve an 143 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 49 efficient use of land and infrastructure, reducing sprawl and preserving open space, agricultural lands, wildlife habitat, and water resources. RC-3.2 Work with Gallatin County to keep rural areas rural and maintain a clear edge to urban development that evolves as the City expands outwards. RC-3.3 Prioritize annexations that enable the incremental expansion of the City and its utilities. RC-3.4 Encourage annexation of land adjacent to the City prior to development and encourage annexation of wholly surrounded areas. RC-3.5 Establish standard practices for sharing development application information and exchanging comments between the City and County. RC-3.6 Develop shared information on development processes. RC-3.7 Provide education and information on the value and benefits of annexation, including existing un-annexed pockets surrounding the City, to individual landowners and the community at large. Establish interlocal agreements, when appropriate, to formalize working relationships and procedures. RC-3.8 Coordinate with Gallatin County for siting, development, and redevelopment of regional parks, emergency services, fairgrounds, transportation facilities, interchanges, or other significant regional services. Goal RC-4: Ensure that all City actions support continued development of the City, consistent with its adopted Plans and standards. RC-4.1 Enhance collaboration between City agencies to ensure quality design and innovation across public and private areas. RC-4.2 Further develop reasonable and relevant metrics for community development within the City’s Planning Area to determine whether the intent of this Plan is being accomplished. RC-4.3 Prioritize human well-being and health in the creation and implementation of land development standards. RC-4.4 Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to:• Implement a twice-yearly code revision cycle. Identify and make revisions to optimize the UDC current conditions. • Incorporate development minimums in designated growth areas.• Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the future land use map. THEME 7: OTHER RELEVANT PLANS Bozeman Strategic Plan – 2018 Fire and EMS Master Plan – 2017 Gallatin County Hazard Mitigation Plan and Community Wildfire Protection Plan – 2019 Triangle Community Plan – 2020 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update – 2015 Water Facility Plan Update – 2017 144 50 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 03 03 | FUTURE LAND USE IMPORTANCE Future land use is the community’s fundamental building block. It is an illustration of the City’s desired outcome to accommodate the complex and diverse needs of its residents. Part of Bozeman’s appeal is its distinct character. Its character comes from the natural setting and includes the sense of place created by constructed landmarks such as Downtown and the MSU campus. Continuing Bozeman’s character as a unique place rather than “Anywhere, USA” is important. There is increasing evidence that sense of place is an important influence on economic development and overall community health. Bozeman’s physical landscape provides residents and visitors variety when moving amongst its streets, bike paths, and trails. This variety is often noted as an important part of Bozeman’s unique character – to experience open, agricultural, and recreational spaces just minutes from dense, urban corridors from the seat of a bike or a car, a bus, or when walking. As Bozeman continues to evolve, promoting this landscape diversity will be important to maintaining the community character that people know and love. Community development oriented on centers of employment and activity shorten travel distances and encourage multi-modal transportation, increase business synergies, and permit greater efficiencies in the delivery of public services. 145 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 51 City activities all require continuous thoughtfulness and planning. Capital improvements, maintenance programs, and plan implementation tools must be regularly evaluated and updated. Ensuring a consistent set of guiding principles provides a higher level of service to residents, minimizes contradictory or conflicting policies that waste resources, and enable a more accurate evaluation of public policies. All of these are reflected in, and shaped by, the way land is used. The character of our well-planned City is defined by urban edges, a varied skyline, centers of employment and activity, pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, and easy access to the natural world. 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 understanding the category descriptions. Land use categories are not regulatory. Each category description can be implemented by multiple zoning districts. The land use categories and descriptions provide a guide for appropriate development and redevelopment locations for civic, residential, commercial, industrial, and other uses. The Future land use 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. 146 52 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP - LAND USE DESCRIPTIONS The Future Land Use Map for the Planning Area is an indispensable part of this Plan. It utilizes ten land use categories to illustrate and guide the intent, type of use, density, and intensity of future development. The map does not always represent existing uses but does reflect the uses that are desired. Although Gallatin County has final approval authority on land development outside the City of Bozeman, land annexed by the City is under the City’s authority. The City has adopted facility plans that enable coordination with Gallatin County. If one or more intergovernmental agreements are developed that address areas outside City limits, development would need to meet the terms of these agreements. Land use categories are not regulatory in and of themselves. The Correlation with Zoning table shows the existing zoning districts that implement the intent of each district. The future land use map is not limited to conditions or needs expected within a certain number of years. It depicts what, at whatever time the land changes use, what the City sees as the best long term use. It may take many plan update cycles before the depicted conditions on the future land use map occur. The Planning Area boundary and development opportunities are coordinated with the City’s water and sewer plans. These plans are periodically updated. The Planning Area boundary and capacity should be reviewed to accommodate changes in these plans. Amendments to the FLUM follow the procedures in Chapter 5. Due to limitations of scale and ability to predict the nuances of land development, the water bodies and streams are not depicted nor are the locations of future parks. The categories are as follows: 1. URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD. This category primarily includes urban density homes in a variety of types, shapes, sizes, and intensities. Large areas of any single type of housing are discouraged. In limited instances, an area may develop at a lower gross density due to site constraints and/or natural features such as floodplains or steep slopes. Complementary uses such as parks, home-based occupations, fire stations, churches, schools, and some neighborhood-serving commerce provide activity centers for community gathering and services. The Urban Neighborhood designation indicates that development is expected to occur within municipal boundaries. This may require annexation prior to development. Applying a zoning district to specific parcels sets the required and allowed density. Higher density residential areas are encouraged to be, but are not required or restricted to, proximity to commercial mixed use areas to facilitate the provision of services and employment opportunities without requiring the use of a car. Near Enterprise Blvd. and Graf St.Northeast NeighborhoodsNear N. Black Ave. and E. Beall St. 147 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 53 2. RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE. This category promotes neighborhoods substantially dominated by housing, yet integrated with small-scale commercial and civic uses. The housing can include single-attached and small single-detached dwellings, apartments, and live-work units. If buildings include ground floor commercial uses, residences should be located on upper floor. variation in building mass, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape. Secondary supporting uses, such as retail, office, and civic uses, are permitted on the ground floor. All uses should complement existing and planned residential uses. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize the human scale with modulation in larger structures. Stand alone, large, non-residential uses are discouraged. Non-residential spaces should provide an interesting pedestrian experience with quality urban design for buildings, sites, and open spaces. This category is appropriate near commercial centers. Larger areas should be well served by multimodal transportation routes. Multi-unit, higher density, urban development is expected. Any development within this category should have a well-integrated transportation and open space network that encourages pedestrian activity and provides ready-access within and adjacent development. Cannery District Northeast NeighborhoodsNear Enterprise Blvd. and Graf St. 148 54 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 3. COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL MIXED USE. The Community Commercial Mixed Use category promotes commercial areas necessary for economic health and vibrancy. This includes professional and personal services, retail, education, health services, offices, public administration, and tourism establishments. Density is expected to be higher than it is currently in most commercial areas in Bozeman and should include multi-story buildings. Residences on upper floors, in appropriate circumstances, are encouraged. The urban character expected in this designation includes urban streetscapes, plazas, outdoor seating, public art, and hardscaped open space and park amenities. High density residential areas are expected in close proximity. Developments in this land use area should be located on one or two quadrants of intersections of the arterial and/or collector streets and integrated with transit and non-automotive routes. Due to past development patterns, there are also areas along major streets where this category is organized as a corridor rather than a center. Although a broad range of uses may be appropriate in both types of locations, the size and scale is to be smaller within the local service areas. Building and site designs made to support easy reuse of the building and site over time is important. Mixed use areas should be developed in an integrated, pedestrian friendly manner and should not be overly dominated by any single use. Higher intensity uses are encouraged in the core of the area or adjacent to significant streets and intersections. Building height or other methods of transition may be required for compatibility with adjacent development. Smaller neighborhood scale areas are intended to provide local service to an area of approximately one half-mile to one mile radius as well as passersby. These smaller centers support and help give identity to neighborhoods by providing a visible and distinct focal point as well as employment and services. Densities of nearby homes needed to support this scale are an average of 14 to 22 dwellings per net acre. Northeast Neighborhoods Ferguson FarmsCannery District 149 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 55 4. TRADITIONAL CORE. The traditional core of Bozeman is Downtown. This area exemplifies high quality urban design including an active streetscape supported by a mix of uses on multiple floors, a high level of walkability, and a rich architectural and local character. Additionally, essential government services and flexible spaces for events and festivals support opportunities for civic and social engagement. The intensity of development in this district is high with a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) well over 1. As Bozeman grows, continued evolution is necessary for long-term resilience. Challenges do exist, particularly around keeping local identity intact, balancing growth sensitively, and welcoming more transportation modes and residents. Underdevelopment and a lack of flexibility can threaten the viability of the land use designation. Future development should be intense while providing areas of transition to adjacent neighborhoods and preserving the character of the Main Street Historic District through context-sensitive development. 5. REGIONAL COMMERCIAL AND SERVICES. Regionally significant developments in this land use category may be developed with physically large and economically prominent facilities requiring substantial infrastructure and location near significant transportation facilities. Due to the scale of these developments, location, and transition between lower- density uses is important. Residential space should be located above the first floor to maintain land availability for necessary services. Development within this category needs well-integrated utilities, transportation, and open space networks that encourage pedestrian activity and provide ready-access within and adjacent to development. Large community scale areas in this land use category are generally 75 acres or larger and are activity centers for several surrounding square miles. These are intended to service the overall community as well as adjacent neighborhoods and are typically distributed by a one-to two-mile separation. Main St.Main St.Babcock St. 1001 Oak Street Highland Blvd.Kenyon Noble 150 56 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 6. MAKER SPACE MIXED USE This classification provides areas for dynamic mixed uses including technology industries, manufacturing, research and development, offices, and supportive uses to provide employment and services to the community. Opportunity for live/work may be provided or housing elements integrated on upper floors of mixed use buildings. Careful consideration is given to public policies supporting compatibility to enable mixed uses to coexist in harmony. Development within these areas is often intensive and the area is connected to significant transportation corridors. Although use in these areas may be intense, they are part of the larger community and standards for architecture and site design apply. Multi-Modal Freight Terminal Northwestern EnergyStraightaway Motors 7. INDUSTRIAL. This classification provides areas for manufacturing, warehousing, technology industries, and transportation hubs. Development within these areas is intensive and is connected to significant transportation corridors. Uses that would be harmed by industrial activities are discouraged from locating in these areas. Although use in these areas is intense, they are part of the larger community and standards for architecture and site design apply. In some circumstances, uses other than those typically considered industrial have been historically present in areas that were given an industrial designation in prior growth policies. Careful consideration must be given to public policies to allow these mixed uses to coexist in harmony. S&S Building Employment with on site residentialOffices 151 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 57 8. PARKS AND OPEN LANDS. All recreational lands, including parks, are included within this category, as well as certain private lands. These areas are generally open in character and may or may not be developed for active recreational purposes. This category includes conservation easements or other private property which may not be open for public use. Sourdough Trail AreaStory Mill Park Meyers Lake 10. NO CITY SERVICES. This category designates areas where development is considered inappropriate over the 20-year planning horizon of this growth policy because of natural features, negative impacts on the desired development pattern, or difficulty providing urban services. As a result, the City does not anticipate building infrastructure to serve these lands at any time during the Planning Period. As the City’s growth policy is updated, some areas currently classified as No City Services may be reclassified. Suburban or rural density subdivisions in these areas are discouraged because they impede an orderly and cost effective expansion of the City. 9. PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS. The land in this classification is owned by a public entity. A variety of activities are undertaken in this land use classification. Schools are a dominant use including Montana State University. Other typical uses are libraries, fire stations, and publicly operated utilities. A significant portion of Bozeman’s employment occurs within this category. Meadowlark Elementary SchoolBozeman Public Library, Main St. City Hall 152 58 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN Legend CORRELATION WITH ZONING The zoning districts which implement each future land use category are shown in relation to each future land use category in chart below. For zoning district intent, see 38.300. For permitted uses, see 38.310. Urban Residential R-S, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-O, REMU RMH, B-1, PLI Residential Mixed Use R-3, R-4, R-5, R-O, B-1, PLI Community Commercial Mixed Use R-O, REMU, B-1, B-2, B-2M, UMU, NEHMU PLI Traditional Core B-2M, B-3, PLI Regional Commercial & Services B-2, B-2M, UMU, PLI Maker Space Mixed Use BP, M-1, NEHMU, PLI Industrial M-1, M-2, BP, PLI Parks & Open Lands PLI Public Institutions PLI Low Density Housing Moderate Density Housing Medium Density Housing High Density Housing & Mixed Use Neighborhood & Community Commercial & Business Office Downtown Business & Mixed Use Large Commercial & Business Manufacturing & Artisan Public Lands, Parks, & Open Space Educational Facilities Civic Buildings & Institutions Maker Space 153 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 59 THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP The Future Land Use Map on the following page identifies the land use catergories that are detailed on the previous pages in Chapter 3. Due to the large scale of the map, any useful review will require access to its digital version, which can be expanded to show details. The City’s web viewer displays the most current digital version of the map at all times. It is available at https:// gisweb.bozeman.net/Html5Viewer/?viewer=planning. Outward development of the City is strongly connected to locations of municipal water and sewer systems. The City has planned for eventual utility services to the Planning Area. The inset map at right shows the location of current City boundaries and where utility services are presently available. New development regularly expands this area. Many mapping resources for utilities, land use, zoning, parks, transportation, floodplains, and other land use related subjects are available through the City’s web portal at https://www. bozeman.net/government/gis-mapping. IN T E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE COTTONWOOD RD S 3RD AVE FR O N T A G E R D DURSTON RD GOOCHHILLRDHUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE WMA I N ST EVALLEYCENTERRD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST DAVIS LN BRIDGER CANYONRD WCOLLEGEST EMAINSTN ROUSE AVE BR I D GERDR SWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD GOLDENSTEIN LN FRONTA G E R D City of Bozeman Planning Area 0 2 41Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´ Growth Policy Boundary City Limits 154 60 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN IN T E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE COTTONWOOD RD S 3RD AVE FR O N T A G E R D DURSTON RD GOOCHHILLRDHUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE WM A I N ST E VALLEY CENTER RD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST DAVIS LN B R I D GER CANYONRD W COLLEGE ST E MAINSTN ROUSE AVE B R I D G ER DR SWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD GOLDENSTEIN LN FRONT A G E R D Future Land Use Map The boudaries depicted on this map are subject to change through individual amendments and growth policy updates as described in Chapter 5 of this growth policy. 0 2 41Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´ Growth Policy Boundary City Limits Parks and Open Lands Urban Neighborhood Traditional Core Residential Mixed Use Regional Commercial and Services Community Commercial Mixed Use Industrial Public Institutions No City Services 155 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 61 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 156 62 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 04 | IMPLEMENTATION 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 will proceed 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. Not all factors needed for success are controlled by the City. Successful implementation of this Plan will require dedication, engagement, and hard work from the community. This Plan is intended to be a living document used daily by the City. Measuring and reporting on the Plan’s efficacy (or outcomes) is a main tenant of the Plan. Successful implementation of the Plan will be enhanced by periodic reporting and by objective monitoring. These activities can determine how well the City’s initial objectives are working, where they can be improved, and what is not working. To that end, the Department of Community Development will annually provide a report to the Planning Board and the City Commission summarizing the actions taken to date to achieve each of the Objectives and Actions described in Chapter 2 and the success of these actions. In addition, objective monitoring will take place at specified intervals based on information availability. 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. 04 157 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 63 SHORT-TERM ACTION LIST This Plan identifies many actions and objectives to address the listed goals. Many actions are ongoing. Some are specific shorter term actions to implement this Plan. The following list is not listed in any order of priority and is drawn from those shorter term actions listed in Chapter 2. 1. Review potential upzoning to implement objectives N-1.1, N-1.2, and N-1.4 . 2. Evaluate zoning map changes needed to implement objectives N-1.3, N-2.1, N-2.2, and N-3.9 consistent with factors identified in Chapter 5, Zoning Amendment Review. 3. Evaluate design standards as identified in objectives N-1.7 and N-2.4. Buildings are to be capable of serving an initial residential purpose and be readily converted to commercial uses when adequate market support for commercial services exists. 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 changes on meeting goals of this plan as noted in objective DCD-2.4.5. Update land development standards to implement the Integrated Water Resources Plan as identified in objective EPO-3.5. 6. Identify missing links in the multimodal system, prioritize those most beneficial to complete, and pursue funding for completion of those links as noted in objectives M-1.4, M-1.9, and M-1.11.7. Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking as part of the overall transportation system for and between districts as noted in objective M-1.12. 8. Revise current intersection level of service design standards to multimodal level of service or traffic stress for people walking, biking, and using transit as identified in objective M-1.3.9. Prepare for establishment of a Metropolitan Planning Organization, anticipated to be required after the completion of the 2020 US Census and noted in objective RC-1.6.10. Establish standard practices for sharing development application information and exchanging comments between the City and County as identified in objective RC-3.5. 11. Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the future land use map as noted in objectives N-1.3, N-2.1, N-2.2, EE-1.6, and RC-4.4.12. Update the UDC to reflect density increases or minimums within key districts as noted in objectives DCD-1.4, EPO-1.6, and RC-4.4. 13. Retain firm that specializes in form-based development codes to evaluate the City's UDC, especially with regard to completing the transition to a form-based code and simplification so that it can be understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff. 14. Work with partner organizations to implement EPO-1.5 to identify and reduce impacts on environmentally sensitive areas. MONITORING AND UPDATESTracking and monitoring the accomplishment of 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 158 64 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN of specific targets for each indicator should be completed within six months of Plan adoption. After that first year, an annual report on the status of each indicator should be provided to the community. Table 5. Monitoring and Updates Indicator Source Frequency Notes Target qualitative City Measures Community Perception of City Performance Citizen Satisfaction Survey 3 year cycle Intent to capture citizen quality of life measures such as ICMA National Citizen Survey Maintain or improve land use related scores a City of unique neigHBorHoods Housing Stock Diversity State of Montana Department of Revenue, MLS 2 years Type, Square footage, number of bedrooms, and number of baths Maintain or increase Residential Density State of Montana, Department of Revenue Real-time data analyzed and published annually Gross dwelling units per acre of residentially-zoned and developed land by zoning district Increase Walk Score Walk Score®Annually Ability to meet basic needs within walking distance Increase a City Bolstered By downtown and CoMPleMentary distriCts Location of Development City of Bozeman, CDD Real-time data analyzed and published annually Development within subdivisions platted more than and less than 35 years ago Increase redevelopment a City influenCed By our natural environMent, Parks, and oPen lands Park Accessibility City of Bozeman, GIS 2 years Percentage of residents/ households within ½-mile walking distance to open space or trails. Increase Vehicle Miles Traveled MDOT 2 years Per capita Reduce a City tHat PrioritiZes aCCessiBility and MoBility CHoiCes Transit Accessibility Streamline Annually Increase ridership.Increase a City Powered By its Creative, innovative, and entrePreneurial eConoMy Land Use Availability City of Bozeman, Community Development Division, GIS Division Monthly data analyzed and published annually Availability of land not for economic activity based on annual land use inventory Maintain a City engaged in regional Coordination City Expansion City of Bozeman, Community Development Division; Gallatin County Planning Staff 2 years Number of projects within the Planning Area but outside of City limits that conform to adopted interlocal agreements Maintain 159 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 65 05 05 | AMENDMENTS + REVIEW PLAN AMENDMENTS NEED FOR BALANCE A growth policy must balance consistency with responsiveness to the needs of the community. If the policy is not consistent, it will have little value as a planning tool, nor provide an adequate basis for implementation actions, nor have the confidence of the community. If the policy is not responsive, policies and actions are continued that no longer address community needs, and less than optimal guidance for future actions is provided. This Plan was prepared based on information and circumstances as understood at this time. The nature of planning for the future is imprecise. As situations change it is important that the Plan be reviewed, and when necessary updated, to accommodate future events. 160 66 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN State law requires review and consideration of the need for amendments through Section 76-1-601(3) (f), of the Montana Code Annotated which reads: “(f) an implementation strategy that includes: (i) a timetable for implementing the growth policy; (ii) a list of conditions that will lead to a revision of the growth policy; and (iii) a timetable for reviewing the growth policy at least once every 5 years and revising the policy if necessary;” Assumptions regarding population growth, land use, and other subjects are embedded in the Plan. Significant changes in the rates or the interaction of these items necessitate a review of the Plan; although, a review may find that no changes are needed. Reviews, if properly done, will help to ensure that the information upon which the Plan is based remains accurate and timely and that the goals and objectives of the Plan reflect the desires of the community. Evaluating the existing growth policy text and maps is an essential part of any review. New inventory maps should be made available for consideration during the review process if the new map would display materially changed information. 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. REVIEW TRIGGERS, AMENDMENTS, AND AMENDMENT CRITERIA REVIEW TRIGGERS The following events require a formal review of the plan: Five years after the plan is adopted it must be reviewed. If a review of the plan is required it should consider: 1. Are the community’s goals current and valid? 2. Have the community conditions or legal framework materially changed? 3. Where have problems appeared since the last review? 4. Can this Plan be modified to better serve the needs and desires of the community? This Plan provides progress indicators as described in Chapter 4. The annual review of those indicators may suggest conducting a review prior to the required five year period. 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— coordination between government programs and policies. All amendments must be carefully evaluated to ensure that changes do not create conflicts between goals, maps, or implementation tools. If a proposed amendment would cause conflicts within the Plan, additional amendments must be identified and reviewed so that conflicts are resolved. WHO MAY INITIATE AMENDMENTS 161 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 67 1. City Commission; independently or at the suggestion of the Planning Board or the City Staff; 2. One or more landowner of property that are the subject of the amendment to the future land use map; and 3. Interested members of the public may suggest modifications to the text. Any proposed changes to either the text or maps contained in this Plan must comply with all of the criteria 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. 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 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 : 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, c. Adversely impacting existing uses because of inadequately mitigated impacts on facilities or services, or d. Negatively affecting the health and safety of the residents. SUBDIVISION REVIEW Subdivisions set the “bones” for a community by establishing the locations for roads, parks, and lots for development. How a subdivision is designed and reviewed can impact Bozeman’s residents for many years to come. Review must be fair to all, allow for identification and resolution of concerns, and provide meaningful opportunities for participation. INTENT AND BACKGROUND Local governments in Montana must review proposed subdivisions. Section 76-3-101 et seq. Montana Code Annotated governs the review of subdivisions. Section 76-3-501 et seq. MCA requires all municipal and county governments to establish subdivision review regulations and establishes the minimum requirements for those regulations. In addition, Section 76-1-601 MCA requires that a growth policy discuss and address various elements of the subdivision review process. This section meets the requirement. Title 76, Chapter 3 MCA contains the requirements and restrictions upon both public and private parties for subdivision review and platting. For full information on this subject interested parties are referred to Title 76, Montana Code Annotated, and Division 38.240 Unified Development Code, City of Bozeman municipal code. Creation of a subdivision often precedes or accompanies a change in the use of that land. A subdivision generally remains in perpetuity and continues to influence the location and intensity of land uses within and adjacent to the subdivision. Therefore, subdivisions are strongly connected to the planning process and may significantly advance or hinder public goals. Because of this strong influence, all subdivisions must comply with the Bozeman growth policy. The subdivision regulations adopted by the City are to direct and govern the review and use of land to ensure they 162 68 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN conform to the Bozeman growth policy. REVIEW PARTICIPANTS Many agencies and review bodies review subdivisions. Reviews are to be conducted by each agency, as needed. The purpose of these reviews is to verify compliance with the law and identify concerns which may require mitigation. These entities may include, but are not limited to the following: • City staff • Recreation and Parks Advisory Board • Private utilities such as power and telecommunications • Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks • Montana Department of Transportation • Pedestrian and Traffic Safety Committee • Irrigation companies • Planning Board • Gallatin County DEFINITIONS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES This section defines the six state established primary criteria for subdivision review and provides an overview of how those criteria are used during the review of subdivisions AGRICULTURE Agriculture is defined as follows: The cultivation or tilling of soil or use of other growing medium for the purpose of producing vegetative materials for sale or for use in a commercial operation and/ or the raising or tending of animals for commercial sale or use. Agriculture does not include gardening for personal use, keeping of house pets or animals as authorized under Chapter 8 of the municipal code, service animals as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act, or landscaping for aesthetic purposes. The following presumptions apply: 1. Property annexed or seeking to be annexed within the depicted urban area shown on the future land use map will generally not be utilized for agricultural purposes over the long term. 2. Agriculture may be appropriate within the City in limited areas where physical constraints make an area undesirable for the construction of buildings, or in support of a commercial business such as a plant nursery or a common community garden. 3. Urban density development within the City of Bozeman facilitates the preservation of agriculture in Gallatin County. It provides a location for the development of residential and employment activities in a compact and efficient manner. This reduces pressure to convert agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses in the county. 4. Undeveloped lands within the City not constrained by physical features should be developed at urban densities. This enables infill development and reduces outward expansion of the City. AGRICULTURAL WATER USER FACILITIES Agricultural water user facilities are defined as follows: Those facilities, which include but are not limited to ditches, pipes, and other water- conveying facilities that provide water for irrigation and stock watering on agricultural lands, with said lands being defined in MCA 15-7-202 The following presumptions apply: 1. Agricultural uses are not generally urban uses. The transition of agricultural lands to urban uses will often remove the need for agricultural water user facilities within the urbanized area. Where a need for protection due to ongoing use for water conveyance can be demonstrated, provision for protection of the facility must be made. 2. The formal abandonment and removal of all agricultural water user facilities within the City must occur in accordance with Montana law. Should the beneficial use cease in the future, an easement for protection of agricultural water user facilities may be removed. 3. The use of agricultural water user facilities for stormwater does not constitute beneficial 163 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 69 use for the purposes of presumption 2 above unless agreed to by the facility owner. Stormwater facilities may require separate easements or other procedures. 4. Agricultural Water User Facilities are subject to Section 70-17-112, and Section 85-7-2211 and 85-7-2212, MCA. LOCAL SERVICES Local Services mean all services provided by governmental bodies for the benefit of residents. This includes, but is not limited to, police, fire, water, recreation, streets, parks, libraries, schools, wastewater, and solid waste collection and disposal. Those criteria to which a specific response and evaluation of impact must be made are listed within the City subdivision regulations. The following presumptions apply: 1. When the City assessed needs and the means of addressing those needs, subdividers will not be required to duplicate that work without good cause. If the City has completed a portion of a required assessment, the subdivider may be required to submit the remaining portion of the necessary information. 2. Capacity and capability in local services is limited. All development shall equitably participate in providing adequate services for itself, including replacement of consumed reserve capacity. Development shall meet levels of service and facility design standards established by the City. 3. Response times, physical space within facilities, compliance with applicable facility Plans, and general design of local service facilities within proposed subdivisions shall be addressed during the preliminary plat review and necessary mitigation is to be provided. 4. Lack of adequate service capacity and capability within local services is grounds for denial of subdivision approval when impacts of proposed subdivisions are not mitigated. EFFECT ON THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT The natural environment is defined as the physical conditions which exist within a given area, including land, water, mineral, flora, fauna, noise, light, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. The following presumptions apply: 1. The natural environment is fundamentally linked with our economic development, as an attraction to new and expanding businesses, a tourist destination, and a basic component of Bozeman’s character. 2. The natural environment should be conserved and development should respect significant natural features and systems. Impacts to consider include road locations, stormwater treatment and discharges, potential contamination of ground or surface water, building placement, and others that may be identified through subdivision, zoning, data inventories, and other implementation tools. Mitigation of negative development impacts is required. WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT Wildlife means animals that are neither human, domesticated, nor feral descendants of commonly domesticated animals. Wildlife habitat means the place or type of habitat where wildlife naturally thrives. Habitat excludes areas developed for human use including agriculture. The following presumptions apply: 1. Lands within the designated urban area are typically utilized for development purposes and will have a minor impact on wildlife habitat. Watercourse corridors and wetlands are an exception to this presumption. The designated urban area includes all lands except the No City Services category shown on the future land use map. 2. The habitat needs of larger and/or predatory wildlife species such as deer, moose, bears, coyotes, or similar species will not be met within urban density development and will likely be in conflict with people. Therefore, these types of animals are found to be 164 70 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN undesirable within the City boundaries. 3. Smaller species, especially birds, are compatible within urban density development and should be preserved, including the encouragement of suitable habitats. 4. High value wetlands, stream corridors, and similar high value habitats should be preserved in accordance with the City’s adopted standards. These provide a variety of recreational, environmental sustainability, and safety values such as flood control as well as habitat. PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY Public health and safety means a condition of optimal well-being, free from danger or injury, for a community at large, as well as for an individual or small groups. The following presumptions apply: 1. Health is a comprehensive subject and threats to health include chronic as well as acute hazards. 2. Subdivision design should encourage physical activity and a healthy community. 3. The creation of hazards to public health and safety are not acceptable and appropriate mitigation must be provided. 4. Some level of risk is always present despite efforts to prevent harm. Developments are not solely responsible for the correction of risks common to all. They should equitably participate in common solutions to common problems. However, the presence of common risks, such as inadequate public services, may prevent approval of a development until the hazard has been removed or corrected. The developer of a subdivision may not accept hazards to public health and safety on behalf of future residents or owners of a subdivision by declaring that necessary infrastructure improvements or other actions are unnecessary. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES An important part of the subdivision review process is the opportunity to offer comments on the proposal. Comments may be given by any interested person. This opportunity is formally provided by the public comment/hearing process. Persons for, against, or seeking information about the proposal may send written comments to the City for transmittal to the appointed or elected officials who review the subdivision, or they may speak at a public hearing. The public hearing, when one is required by state law, on a subdivision proposal may be held by either the Planning Board and/or the City Commission. Planning Board makes the recommendation to the City Commission regarding the proposed subdivision’s compliance with the Bozeman Community Plan. Regardless of which body holds a hearing, a similar procedure is required. Generally, the format for a subdivision public hearing is as follows: 1. The public hearing will be advertised as required by state law and Divisions 38.220 and 38.240 of the City of Bozeman Municipal Code. 2. The public hearing will be conducted at the time and place advertised. 3. A report on the project by the Department of Community Development, including an analysis of compliance with the Plan, regulatory standards and a recommendation of approval, denial, or approval with conditions is given. 4. Presentation by the applicant and the applicant’s representative(s). 5. Questions from the Commission or Planning Board to staff or the applicant. 6. The public hearing/comment is opened with persons able to speak for, against, or to seek additional information from applicant or staff. A time limit may be established for each speaker. The public is encouraged to provide a factual basis for their support or opposition to a subdivision and base their comments on subdivision review criteria. 7. When all persons have had opportunity to 165 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 71 speak, the public hearing/comment will be closed and the Commission or Planning Board will then return to its discussion of the project. They will evaluate the application materials, the staff report, public testimony, and the requirements of subdivision law and regulations. The Commission or Planning Board may inquire of staff, applicants, or the public for clarification or additional information in order to complete their evaluation. 8. The Planning Board will forward a recommendation to the City Commission. 9. The City Commission will make their decision on record during the review of the subdivision. The record includes all application materials, staff review, public comments, and other materials provided prior to the Commission’s action. 10. When the City Commission has rendered their decision, the City will prepare findings of fact which establish the official record and decision. 11. An approval or denial of a subdivision may be appealed to the District Court after a final decision has been rendered. Appeals are subject to state law requirements. ZONING AMENDMENT REVIEW Zoning establishes many of the standards and review processes for the use of land. Amendments to zoning change the rules with consequence. Therefore, zoning amendments are reviewed deliberately and in public. Review must be fair to all, allow for identification and resolution of concerns, and provide meaningful opportunities for participation. INTENT AND BACKGROUND Sections 76-2-301, et seq., Montana Code Annotated, authorizes local governments to adopt zoning. As each community uses zoning differently, the authorization identifies certain purposes and processes but leaves most of the details to each community. Chapter 38, Unified Development Code, City of Bozeman municipal code outlines local details. “76-2-301. Municipal zoning authorized. For the purpose of promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community, the City or town council or other legislative body of cities and incorporated towns is hereby empowered to regulate and restrict the height, number of stories, and size of buildings and other structures; the percentage of lot that may be occupied; the size of yards, courts, and other open spaces; the density of population; and the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes.” WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE ZONED? It means the City has adopted standards and procedures for the development and use of property within the City. Zoning indicates the character of an area by applying use and development standards to an individual property. Essentially, zoning addresses public safety, public welfare, and compatibility between uses. Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is the zoning code. The City applies standards and procedures to individual properties through the zoning map. The City will not modify those standards and procedures without public notice and participation. The City does not represent or commit to anyone that the standards and procedures will not change. HOW IS ZONING APPLIED TO PROPERTY? The zoning map shows the designation that applies to each property. The zoning map covers the entire area within City boundaries. The zoning district map assigns a designation to each property in the City. Once applied, the standards and procedures for each district apply to land designated within each district until the City amends the map or text of Chapter 38. Since 1935, the City has adopted a change to the zoning map or text over 500 times including replacing the entire code 19 times. The most recent overall replacement took effect in March 2018. 166 72 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN WHO CAN CHANGE THE ZONING TEXT OR MAP? Only the City Commission can approve an amendment and only after notifying the public of the possible change and giving people a chance to participate in the change. As a legislative action, amendments are made through a process called a “map” or a “text” amendment. There is a defined public process for amendments to occur. See below for a summary of that process. The process to initiate amendments is established in 38.260, BMC. The City has created a process for anyone to suggest potential changes. WHAT IS NEEDED TO JUSTIFY A CHANGE IN A ZONING DISTRICT MAP OR TEXT? A change to the zoning text or map is a legislative action. The City Commission can initiate or approve amendments when they believe they are appropriate. In determining whether to begin a City initiated amendment, the Commission can consider broad legislative factors such as the passage of time, changes in the needs of the community, outside actions like court decisions or new laws, whether the existing map or text is reaching the intended outcome, and changes like installation of new infrastructure. Some examples include the following: a. Changes to state or federal law that the zoning must address or if it is in conflict with the changes, zoning must address. b. Court decisions changing the interpretation of meaning of the law that interacts with zoning. c. Change in circumstances including the current zoning does not comply with the City’s adopted Community Plan (i.e. its growth policy), policies within the Growth Policy have changed, land is annexed, or infrastructure is newly available. d. An owner requests the change and the request meets required standards. Items a and b are most likely to generate changes in the text; items c and d are more likely to generate changes in the zoning map. In considering zoning map amendments, the City’s longstanding practice is to consider item d as an adequate justification for consideration of a zoning map change. In doing so, the applicant/property owner must demonstrate the requested change meets the required criteria and guidelines for an amendment. The City’s zoning establishes what responsibilities exist, such as controlling stormwater, and requires people to meet those responsibilities. Zoning also addresses the balance of interests between adjacent properties by defining districts where similar uses can be compatible and providing for transitions and buffers between zoning districts where the City determines it is necessary to control impacts and prevent the use of one person’s property right from inappropriately impacting another. When such protections are in place it is appropriate for the property owner to have an opportunity to ask for changes to zoning. If an owner does not show that criteria and guidelines are successfully met the City Commission can choose not to approve the change. This does not prevent the City from initiating a change on its own. To provide transparency in decision making, accountability, and public participation the zoning map or text amendment process requires public notice and hearings. Before any action to approve an amendment, the Commission must address the criteria, which provide guidance in deciding whether an amendment is acceptable. WHEN DOES THE CITY INITIATE ZONING CHANGES TO INCREASE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES? The City Commission may initiate an amendment to the zoning map to enable additional development in a specific area. In examining whether to do so, the Commission may consider many factors including but not limited to the following: • The existing zone district does not match the growth policy future land use map in Chapter 3. • Forty percent or more of the existing uses 167 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 73 within an area are not principal uses within the zone district presently in place. • There is 40% or more available sewer capacity and there is less than 10% vacant land within the sewer drainage area. • Proximity to parks that are larger than 1 acre. • Vacant annexed areas which are 10 acres or larger in size. • Areas within ¼ mile of MSU (roughly 4 blocks) and not in a National Register Historic District. • Revising zoning boundaries to better follow preferred dividing lines such as streets or watercourses. • Request of multiple landowners in the area. • Available capacity in the water plant and water reclamation facilities and permits. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS AND THEIR APPLICATION This section includes the four criteria and five guidelines for zoning amendments. These are from state law. This section gives an overview of how those criteria and guidelines apply during the review of individual zoning map amendments. Section 76-2-304 of state law establishes the criteria, section (1), and guidelines, section (2), for the creation and amendment of zoning. Due to the range of subjects, the applicability of any individual criterion may be of more or less importance. The City Commission must evaluate whether the applicable criteria are met, not applicable, or if the benefits of the change offset negative impacts. Below is the state statute that provide the criteria and guidelines for zoning decisions: 76-2-304. CRITERIA AND GUIDELINES FOR ZONING REGULATIONS. 1. Zoning regulations must be: a. Made in accordance with a growth policy; and b. Designed to: i. Secure safety from fire and other dangers; ii. Promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare; and iii. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements 2. In the adoption of zoning regulations, the municipal governing body shall consider: a. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air; b. The effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; c. Promotion of compatible urban growth; d. The character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses; and e. Conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. HOW THE CRITERIA AND GUIDELINES ARE APPLIED 76-2-304(1) criteria. Under state law, (1) zoning regulations must be “(a) made in accordance with a growth policy.” This criterion gives the Commission latitude. Zoning map amendments’ are to correlate to the future land use map. Beyond that, policy statements such as goals and objectives are weighed. In a text amendment, policy statements weigh heavily as the standards being created or revised implement the growth policy’s aspirations and intent. The City must balance many issues in approving urban development. Therefore, it is not unusual if there is some tension between competing priorities, even if there is no explicit contradiction of policy. As shown in the state statute, zoning must also “(b) be designed to”: i. Secure safety from fire and other dangers; ii. Promote public health, public safety, and the general welfare; and iii. Facilitate the adequate provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks, and other public requirements. For a map amendment, all three of the above elements are addressed primarily by the City’s long range facility Plans, the City’s capital 168 74 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN improvements program, and development standards adopted by the City. The standards set minimum sizing and flow requirements, require dedication of parks, provision of right of way for people and vehicles, keep development out of floodplains, and other items to address public safety, etc. It is often difficult to assess these issues in detail on a specific site. For example, at the time of annexation, the final intensity of development is unknown and it may be many years before development occurs and the impacts are experienced. The availability of other planning and development review tools must be considered when deciding the degree of assurance needed to apply an initial zoning at annexation. The City’s building codes reduce reliance on zoning to address other elements of public safety. For example, requirements for fire sprinklers for larger buildings are addressed in the building codes, but not in the zoning code. In addition, the subdivision review process outline’s the backbone for public infrastructure. This includes most water, sewer, stormwater, and street facilities. Development review under zoning procedures gives a final check on infrastructure capacity when there is a known intended intensity of use and condition of facilities. Considering what infrastructure is already present, such as in infill situations, or whether placing one zoning district next to another may reduce travel distances and increase walkability, are also factors that can play into this criterion. It is not only about production of more, but also of best use of public facilities. If a proposed change to the map is contrary to the facility plans, or causes substantial inadequacy over the long term, then denial of the amendment may be warranted. (2) In the adoption of zoning regulations, the municipal governing body shall consider the following: (a) Reasonable provision of adequate light and air; Bozeman has established generally applicable standards for setbacks, park dedication, on-site open space, and building design standards to address this requirement. This is done during the creation of the zoning text. Therefore, when considering changes to the map, this issue is addressed for all districts. In addition, the building codes have standards for ingress and egress, ventilation, and related subjects that further support delivery of adequate light and air. Care is needed if the City revises the standards themselves. (b) The effect on motorized and nonmotorized transportation systems; This guideline looks at the anticipated change that may occur due to the amendment. It does not require there be less of an impact than from the existing condition, whether it be text or map that is the focus. The City relies upon its long- range transportation plan to evaluate transportation needs over the long term for motorized vehicles as well as bikes and pedestrians. The park and trail plan also considers options for extending the trail network. Plans are periodically updated to ensure they are applicable to current conditions. Review of development proposals such as subdivisions or site development look at the transportation, park and trail, and facility plans, consider existing conditions, and requires the additional on and off-site improvements needed to meet the additional demand expected from new development. Development creates or funds many of the City’s local streets, intersection upgrades, and trails. Therefore, although a text or map amendment may allow more intense development than before, compliance with the adopted Plans and standards 169 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 75 will provide adequate capacity to offset that increase. The City’s development standards require on-site parking for bicycles and motor vehicles and pedestrian circulation within each site. Articles 38.4 and 38.5 of the UDC regulate parking and circulation. If the Commission considers a substantial change to the standards it must examine the cumulative impacts. The capacity of a street to handle traffic can be viewed differently by local residents, traffic engineers, and Planners. The long-range transportation plan establishes the standards for what is “too much” on each class of road. The impact of additional development is not excessive so long as the planned capacity of the road is not exceeded. New development contributes to the creation of additional capacity through dedication of right of way, construction or reconstruction of streets, payment of impact fees, and other contributions as may be applicable to a specific project. These requirements may mitigate the impacts of additional development. Development that is more intense requires greater transportation capacity. Therefore, it is good, but not required, to have more intensive districts near arterial and collector roads. (c) Promotion of compatible urban growth; This guideline focuses on what happens at the edge of the City, as well as what occurs in the heart of the City. Section 38.700.040, BMC defines the factors considered in determining compatibility. This definition explicitly rejects uniformity as being necessary for compatibility. Compatibility is considered within and between districts. The determination of compatibility takes place at several levels, including 1) what uses are allowed within each district, 2) creation of standards for new development to lessen impacts to adjacent land/persons, 3) creation of building and site design standards, and 4) application of future land use areas through the community plan and development of the zoning map. When the Commission considers a text amendment, the majority of the focus is on items 1 through 3, above. What combination of uses under what conditions can work well together? There is a wide range of possible answers for each community to consider. Some communities take a highly prescriptive worst-case view and try to restrain all possible points of perceived conflict. This tends to create a very homogenous community with little interest or scope for creativity. Bozeman takes a different approach. The worst- case scenario is recognized as unlikely, but possible. Development standards deal with the majority of cases, while restraining extraordinary problems. An example is stormwater management where a certain minimum level of control is required, but there are many acceptable alternative methods to address the issue. When considering zoning map amendments, the Commission first looks at the future land use map created by the growth policy. See discussion under Criterion 1(a) above. The planning process refers to high level various policies to identify community priorities. In Bozeman’s case, those policies consistently emphasize quality of development, infill in a manner that allows for additional intensification over time, connecting land development to other community priorities like multi-modal transportation, cost efficient user-pays provision of facilities, and reasonable incremental development at the City edge. These and other policies influence the layout of the future land use 170 76 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN map. The City creates standards under items 1 through 3; when one district is adjacent to another and is consistent with the growth policy, any physical conflicts will be minimal, if present at all. The City’s zoning policy encourages continued development of mixed uses. This is seen in the older areas of the City, which were built before zoning. The City uses the broad scope of its development standards to enable differing uses to be successful near each other. This shows on the zoning map where districts providing a wide diversity of uses are intermixed. (d) The character of the district and its peculiar suitability for particular uses; and The second element of this guideline reflects the application of the statutory criteria to a wide diversity of purposes and communities. Some land has a unique physical attribute that makes it more appropriate for one use than another. That attribute may be inherent in the land itself or due to proximity to something else. For example, the City’s land adjacent to the East Gallatin River is well suited for the Parks and Open Lands and the Public Institutions districts because it supports both recreational functions in Story Mill Park and an essential water treatment role at the Water Reclamation Facility. The character of a district is seen from two different viewpoints. First, when considering an amendment to the text, the integration of a proposed change is evaluated with the other standards, purposes, and criteria of site review. If the new change conflicts with other text, then the new change should be rejected, or other revisions made, so that the overall standards for a given district support one another. Second, when considering an amendment to the zoning map both the actual and possible built environment are evaluated. If the amendment is accompanying an annexation request there is often a substantial change in use that will occur. In this case, the Commission must look at what the growth policy recommends for the area, as there is less built context to provide guidance. A zoning district change for land already within the City requires greater consideration of the current actual and possible environment. Most of Bozeman has zoning that allows more development than the current owners utilize. This reflects many personal preferences and economic decisions. There is no specified distance in state law or local code outside of the boundary of a map amendment that describes the “district” to be considered. The City provides direct notice to landowners out to 200 feet from the outer boundary of the area to be given a new zoning designation by the map amendment. This is notice, not the distance that dictates the extent of the analysis. Impacts from a zoning change may be less or more than 200 feet depending on the nature of the change and what already exists. State law recognizes that persons owning land within 150 feet have a unique interest in the decision to rezone and gives them the ability to protest the zoning. It is notable that the protest does not stop a rezoning, but requires a greater majority of the Commission to approve. If there is adequate reason for the change, it can go forward. Nothing in the zoning amendment or site review criteria requires the Commission restrict one owner because an adjacent owner chooses to not use all zoning potential. The City is not obligated 171 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 77 to enforce or recognize any privately imposed restrictions, such as a covenant, on land. Such restrictions are not subject to the same public notice or participation requirements as City actions. Landowners have both rights and obligations. To find that an amendment application should be approved, the application materials and review need show the amendment meets the required criteria for approval. This is a very site specific evaluation and may consider but is not obligated to give preference to what adjacent owners have chosen to do with their property. When evaluating compliance with criteria, it is appropriate to consider all the options allowed by the requested district and not only what the present applicant describes as their intensions. The City Commission must consider several items in its decision on a zone map amendment. First, the Commission must consider the nature of the dominant uses allowed in a district compared with adjacent properties. For example, are they both residential or is one residential and another non-residential. Bozeman has an existing pattern of diverse zoning districts in proximity to each other. Second, the Commission should consider differences in allowed intensity between the districts such as differences in height, setbacks, or lot coverage. The greater the difference the more likely conflict is possible. An incremental change between two similar districts may, for example, have the same setbacks and very similar maximum heights. Next, the Commission must decide whether a larger community benefit exists such as locating a fire station where it will serve the adjacent property but is different from the surrounding zoning. Finally, the Commission must ask what separates one zone from another. The City strives to locate zoning boundaries along visible and natural dividing lines such as streets, trail corridors, creeks, or parks. At a minimum, zoning boundaries should follow property boundaries. The greater the physical separation, the less likely there may be a conflict. For example, a local street, typically 60 feet wide, when combined with the standards for site development, is generally considered an adequate separation—even for substantially different districts. (e) Conserving the value of buildings and encouraging the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional area. There are two elements to this guideline. First, conserving the value of buildings applies to changes that may lessen the functional utility of a property. Changes that increase opportunities on a property are unlikely to fail this test. Some reduction in value can happen with adequate justification. Requiring a development to mitigate impacts on its site that lowers development potential is acceptable. The need for that mitigation must be demonstrated. Assertions that allowing a more intensive zoning may lessen values on adjacent properties is best addressed under the guideline regarding the character of the district. The financial value of land changes constantly based on many factors. Properties considered undesirable at one time may be sought after as circumstances change or the reverse. Value may be primarily in the eye of the beholder and not supported by neutral and objective evaluation. There is no defined decline in financial value or utility that proves an automatic failure of this guideline. Encouraging the most appropriate use of land connects back to criterion 1(a) and 172 78 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN the growth policy and guideline 2(d) and peculiar suitability for particular uses. The future land use map and policies of the growth policy should merge to establish priorities for land use that consider whether a given location is genuinely unique. There are circumstances where combinations of uses, such as high density housing close to employment, community amenities, and transportation, reinforce each other. PUBLIC REVIEW AND HEARING PROCEDURES An amendment to the zoning text or map can be initiated by a property owner or by the City Commission. Division 38.260, BMC has the requirements for initiating an amendment. A general outline of the public hearing process for an application follows. As a legislative process, the City Commission has discretion in making their decision. An important part of the amendment review process is the opportunity to offer comments on the proposal. Any interested person or group may give comments. The public hearing process formally provides this opportunity. Persons for, against, or merely seeking information about the proposal may submit comments to the appointed or elected officials who must review the request. The required public hearings on a zoning amendment are by the Zoning Commission and the City Commission. The Zoning Commission gives a recommendation to the City Commission regarding the proposed amendment’s compliance with the review criteria. The typical format for a public hearing on a zoning amendment follows: 1. The public hearing is advertised as required by state law and Division 38.220 of the City of Bozeman Municipal Code. Written public comments may be submitted to the City prior to the beginning of the public hearing. 2. The public hearing will be conducted at the time and place advertised. 3. A report on the review by the Department of Community Development, including an analysis of compliance with the growth policy, review criteria, and a recommendation of approval or denial is provided. 4. Presentation by applicant and applicant’s representative(s). In the event the amendment is initiated by the City, this is usually the same as step 3 above. 5. Questions from the City Commission or Zoning Commission to staff or applicant 6. The public hearing is opened with persons able to speak for, against, or to seek additional information from the applicant or staff. A time limit may be established for each speaker. Commenters may also submit comments in writing. The public is encouraged to provide in their comments a factual basis related to specific review criteria for their support or opposition to an amendment. 7. When all persons have had opportunity to speak, the public hearing will be closed and the City Commission or Zoning Commission will then return discussion of the project to themselves. They will evaluate the application materials, the staff report, public written and spoken testimony, and the amendment review criteria and procedures. The City Commission or Zoning Commission may inquire of staff, applicants, or the public for clarification or additional information in order to complete their evaluation. 8. A majority of a Zoning Commission quorum is adequate to render a decision. The Zoning Commission forwards a recommendation to the City Commission. 9. After the City Commission has conducted their public hearing, they make their decision on the record established during the public hearing. This includes the application materials, staff report, Zoning Commission recommendation, public comments, and all other relevant material presented during the 173 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 79 review. 10. When the City Commission has rendered their decision the process for a formal two- step ordinance adoption as required in state law is required before any amendment is final. An approval or denial of amendment may be appealed to District Court after a final decision has been rendered. Appeals are subject to the requirements of state law. 174 80 BOZEMANMT 2020 COMMUNITY PLAN 175 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 81 176 177 BOZEMANMT COMMUNITY PLAN PLAN APPENDICES CITY COMMISSION DRAFT 20 OCTOBER 2020 178 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 179 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 III CONTENTS A. ENGAGEMENT + PROCESS TO CREATE THE PLAN A-1 PHASE ONE | FOUNDATION A-1 PHASE TWO | ANALYSIS + VISION A-4 PHASE THREE | OPPORTUNITIES + CHOICES A-6 PHASE FOUR | DRAFT + FINAL PLAN A-9 B. INFRASTRUCTURE + SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS B-1 STRATEGY FOR DEVELOPMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE B-1 C. INVENTORY REPORT C-1 HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE C-1 EXISTING CONDITIONS C-12 PHYSIOGRAPHY C-15 SOCIOECONOMICS C-17 D. PROJECTIONS REPORT D-1 POPULATION PROJECTIONS D-1 HOUSING AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING SPACE PROJECTIONS D-2 LAND DEMAND PROJECTIONS D-3 LOCAL SERVICES PROJECTIONS D-4 NATURAL RESOURCES PROJECTIONS D-4 E. 76-1-601(4) (C) INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN E-1 F. GLOSSARY F-1 180 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. 181 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 v 0 SUMMARY BY APPENDIX APPENDIX A: ENGAGEMENT AND PROCESS TO CREATE THE PLAN Appendix A details the outreach and engagement process that helped shape the Community Plan. The four-phase process used in-person and digital approaches to engagement to capture the voice of the community. • Phase One (Foundation) engaged the community and determined what people love about Bozeman, what people believe could be improved about Bozeman, and their vision for Bozeman’s future. • Phase Two (Analysis and Vision) built upon the engagement in Phase One and refined the plan themes that were developed based upon Phase One comments from the community. Furthermore, participants were asked to consider opportunities that can help the City realize its vision. • Phase Three (Opportunities and Choices) outreach involved a community event held at the Bozeman Public Library and an online questionnaire that were designed to gather community input on the specific opportunities that coincide with each of the six Themes. • Phase Four (Draft and Final Plan), the final phase in the Community Plan Update process was conducted over the course of several months to ensure community opportunity to review the document, satisfaction with, and acceptance of the Plan. Community comments provided throughout the first three phases were incorporated into this final Plan which includes specific goals, objectives, and designated indicators to measure success of each goal. 182 APPENDIX B: INFRASTRUCTURE AND SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS Appendix B includes references to the City’s key infrastructure plans, with descriptions of, and links to each plan document. Included plans detail future and existing plans for topics including but not limited to transportation, storm water, wastewater, parks and open space, public safety, economic development, housing, and parking. APPENDIX C: INVENTORY REPORT Appendix C details the history of the City of Bozeman, along with existing conditions text that highlight where the City currently is, and the direction is has been trending in. Statistics and text in this section are taken directly from the Demographic and Real Estate Market Assessment prepared by Economic and Planning Systems (EPS) in 2018. Demographic information included highlights existing population characteristics such as total count, income, and age, as well as housing, employment, and commercial and industrial statistics. APPENDIX D: PROJECTIONS REPORT As with Appendix C, projections shown in Appendix D have been extracted from the Demographic and Real Estate Market Assessment prepared by Economic and Planning Systems (EPS). Projections include population, employment, and housing growth, as well as demand projections for land, housing, commercial, and industrial space. APPENDIX E: INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN PER 76-1-601(4)(C) MCA The law authorizing growth policies allows additional items to be added to a growth policy. One of those items is a discussion on how infrastructure is expanded, the consequences of that expansion, and how negative effects of the expansion can be mitigated. APPENDIX F: GLOSSARY Defines specific terms used in the Plan. 183 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 A-1 ENGAGEMENT + PROCESS TO CREATE THE PLAN Residents, property owners, stakeholders, and public officials shaped this Community Plan throughout a progressive four-phase update process. PHASE ONE | FOUNDATION The Foundation Phase engaged the community and determined what people love about Bozeman, what people believe could be improved about Bozeman, and their vision for Bozeman’s future. Outreach efforts consisted of an ice cream social event at Dinosaur Park, one-on-one interviews, group sessions, Planning Board and City Staff meetings, and an online questionnaire. A 184 A-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES Responses indicated that Bozeman’s outdoor lifestyle, sense of place and belonging while in a City environment, and high quality of life were the three aspects of the City that people loved the most. Areas where participants felt Bozeman could improve were; multimodal transportation, the preservation of farmland and open space, and housing affordability. When asked about the desired future of Bozeman, people envisioned a larger city with a dynamic, modern economy, a variety of attainable housing options, and a multimodal transportation system. SUMMARY BACkGROUND What is the Community Plan and what is its purpose? Imagine what Bozeman will look and feel like in twenty years. How will the community accept a large increase of residents? How will transportation be addressed? Will we grow upward or outward in relation to density? What will Bozeman be known for? The Community Plan builds on the overarching vision and vision statements within the Strategic Plan and specifically guides land use planning decisions. The passage of time, as well as a high rate of development, changing economic conditions, and maturing nearby communities make it necessary to update the Plan and through its process, identify the community supported answers to those questions above. NOTIFICATION AND INTERVIEW PROCESS Stakeholders were contacted directly through email and in-person interviews were conducted at the Community Development building. The interviews focused on the aspects of Bozeman that the participants loved, areas where improvement is needed in the future, and a vision for Bozeman in the year 2040. Stakeholders were asked to complete the online survey as well as invite their colleagues in the community to participate. In addition, everyone interested had access to multiple listening sessions provided throughout the community. Participation was recruited by direct email, news releases, and other broadly applicable outreach. 185 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 A-3 OVERALL SUMMARY What do you LOVE most about Bozeman? Top 10 List (LOVES) 1. Small Town Feel 2. Outdoor Lifestyle 3. The People 4. Bike/Trail Network 5. Parks & Recreation 6. Architecture 7. Connectivity 8. Central Location 9. Downtown 10. Climate What would you like to IMPROVE about Bozeman in the future? Top 10 List (IMPROVES) 1. Growth Management 2. Improve Transparency 3. Multimodal Transportation 4. Improve Infrastructure 5. Neighborhood Identity 6. Reduce Regulations 7. City Leadership 8. Increase Walkability 9. Historic Preservation 10. Alleviate Traffic In 2040, Bozeman will be… Top 10 List (2040) 1. Multimodal Transportation 2. Well-Preserved 3. Small Town Feel 4. High Quality of Life 5. Bikeable 6. Walkable 7. Distinct Neighborhoods 8. Regional Growth 9. Vibrant 10. Model City kEY TAkEAWAYS The stakeholders of Bozeman are very passionate about the City and take pride in the sense of place, belonging, and outdoor lifestyle that Bozeman provides. The close-knit community, access to nature, the high quality of architectural design, and Downtown were also frequently mentioned as aspects that interviewees loved about the City. Stakeholders were most concerned about the potential for Bozeman to become sprawled and cited its issues with the transportation system, the need for government transparency, and absence of neighborhood identity. These are areas Bozeman should improve in the future. In 2040, Stakeholders imagined Bozeman to be a well-preserved city that has maintained its sense of place and belonging with a multimodal transportation system that provides access to a series of distinct and vibrant neighborhoods. Several comments highlighted that Bozeman will be a model city for others to base their future development upon. 186 A-4 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES PHASE TWO | ANALYSIS + VISION Phase Two built upon the engagement in Phase One and refined the seven themes that were developed based upon Phase One comments from the community. Furthermore, participants were asked to consider opportunities that can help the City realize its vision. Outreach efforts consisted of a community event, one-on-one interviews, group sessions, City Commission presentations, and an online questionnaire. People stated that they would like to see increased corner-commercial developments in or near neighborhoods, improved multimodal transportation options and access throughout the community, increased density, historic preservation, and greater regional planning efforts. SUMMARY NOTIFICATION This Community Event was publicized at two public events; at updates to the City Commission and Bozeman Planning Board; direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part of this process; social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter accounts; postcards at highly trafficked locations and other ongoing City and community events. PURPOSE Each step in the Community Plan update process is built to collect a greater level of detail than the previous step, through thought provoking questions and exercises. The purpose of the Community Event was to begin defining specific opportunities that can help the City realize the seven themes that were developed through previous outreach efforts. THE EVENT The Community Event took place at the Bozeman Public Library on Thursday, November 29th, between 5 and 7pm. Members from City staff and consultant team provided an overview of the Community Plan, progress to-date, and instructions for the opportunities exercise. Participants were asked to choose four themes to provide opportunities for, and given a chance to physically locate areas for opportunities by drawing on a large-scale map of Bozeman. Approximately 45 people attended the event. Identified Opportunities, Summarized by Theme The Shape of the City: Support the development of an additional regional park within the City • Strengthen the viability of other areas to distribute goods and services and alleviate congestion Downtown • Integrate walkable areas throughout the City • Foster increased development within the northeast area of the City • Encourage appropriately-sized commercial nodes within neighborhoods • Maintain and improve the City’s infrastructure • Reduce the prevalence of large parking lots to promote walkability A City of Unique Neighborhoods: Define specific neighborhoods through the identification of unique features • Facilitate increased community engagement through additional parks, community centers, and commercial nodes • Coordinate improved public transportation access throughout neighborhoods • Increase neighborhood density through the rezoning / up-zoning of vacant lots • Permit farmers’ markets and food trucks to use vacant lots • Locate affordable housing near public transit and necessary amenities • Expand workforce housing near Montana 187 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 A-5 State University • Consider implementing a resort tax • Preserve the unique identity of northeast Bozeman A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complementary Districts: • Identify a district at the west end of the City to promote a cohesive, walkable destination • Investigate North 7th as the primary location for taller buildings • Establish and enforce density minimums on North 7th • Emphasize affordable housing along North 7th • Reassess the historical significance of structures on North 7th • Promote compatible infill Downtown • Develop parklets and additional greenspace throughout districts • Promote commercial development near Montana State University A City Influenced by Our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Space: Maintain healthy urban forests • Establish public transit connections to parks • Implement trail corridors • Preserve and utilize creek corridors as a way to support walkability and water quality • Enhance wayfinding throughout parks and open space • Create connections between parks and the neighborhoods around them • Retain the mountain views through the development of wide streets • Ensure parks and open space are accessible to all ages • Improve lighting in parks to promote year- round use • Incentivize trail construction in fringe developments A City Influenced by Regional Cooperation and Defined Edges: • Expand the City’s planning jurisdiction • Focus on long-term water conservation to avoid additional infrastructure costs in the future • Explore the annexation of inholdings to promote efficiency of services • Adjust tax policy for inholdings to be commensurate with the surrounding zoning district • Encourage school districts to stay within City limits A City that Prioritizes Mobility Choices: • Coordinate with the Streamline to develop a circulator transit route between Downtown, The Cannery, and North 7th • Expand access to public transportation and frequency of service • Increase infrastructure funding for multimodal transportation options • Amplify winter maintenance of bike routes • Reduce the frequency of large delivery vehicles on Main Street • Further develop east/west bicycle corridors • Explore commercial nodes to the west to reduce congestion Downtown • Improve wayfinding to promote pedestrian activity • Designate key locations for protected bike routes A City Powered by its Creative, Innovative, and Entrepreneurial Economy: • Attract high-paying jobs through the promotion of Bozeman’s high quality of life • Consider a sales tax as an alternative to property tax increases • Collaborate with local educational institutions to increase the qualified workforce base • Foster Bozeman’s local agriculture industry through the support of agri-hoods and food distribution centers • Recognize the potential benefit of attracting and promoting the sustainability industry and “green” start-up companies • Encourage the use of live/work spaces to support small businesses and housing affordability 188 A-6 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES PHASE THREE | OPPORTUNITIES + CHOICES Phase Three outreach involved an online questionnaire that was designed to gather community input on the specific opportunities that coincide with each of the seven Themes. Multiple tools were used to encourage participation including news posts on the City website, direct emails to those who had supplied their contact info as part of this process; and social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter accounts. Increasing walkability and access to neighborhood commercial uses, along with strategically locating affordable housing were just some of the many proposed opportunities from the public event. 230 people took part in the online survey and, in addition to the objectives mentioned above, increasing density, preserving open space, and establishing multimodal connections were suggested. SUMMARY OVERVIEW The Opportunities Survey was opened to the public on December 12, 2018 and closed on January 25, 2019. A total of 230 people took part in the survey, designed to identify and confirm opportunities related to the seven vision statements. Later in the year, at the Sweet Pea Festival and SLAM festival, a follow-up questionnaire was held with similar results from approximately 200 responses. As shown in the chart below, the three most selected visions were: 1. A City Influenced by our Mountains, Open Space, and Parks; 2. A City that Prioritizes Mobility Choices; and 3. A City of Neighborhoods. The Shape of the City Participants indicated that commercial nodes are needed in the northwest neighborhoods, North 7th, and south of Kagy and generally felt that the seven story height was appropriate and used the Baxter Hotel as an example. However, some responses indicated a desire to see shorter buildings in the future in areas where mountain views could be diminished. Downtown, North 7th, 19th, and the Cannery District were all said to be areas where more intense development should take place. Additionally, responses showed that there was a preference for more intense development in those areas if open space in town was maintained and continually expanded through new developments. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Increasing density in appropriate areas • Incentivizing infill as a way to increase density • Preserving open space • Promoting affordable housing along transit corridors • Reducing parking minimums • Focusing on alternative transportation options Participants in the questionnaire indicated that pedestrian-friendly streetscapes and the integration with surrounding natural landscapes were the two items within the theme that they were most excited about. *It is important to note that this theme was removed and its components were consolidated into the other six themes, where appropriate. A City of Unique Neighborhoods It was recognized that a neighborhood is a concept without a simple definition. Characteristics of neighborhoods included: proximity to parks; walkability; cohesiveness amongst neighbors; and diversity of ages, specific boundaries, and historic or cookie-cutter nature. While 60% of respondents stated that their neighborhood included walkable centers, commercial nodes, inclusivity, housing variety, schools, and parks, the remaining 40% of people indicated that walkability and commercial nodes were missing from their communities. 189 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 A-7 When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Encouraging small grocery store development • Maintaining housing character in new developments • Increasing connectivity to parks and neighborhoods • Encouraging affordable housing development • Developing community gardens • Improving pedestrian and bike access • Enhancing traffic calming measures • Promoting accessory dwelling units Participants in the questionnaire indicated that they were most excited about convenient and accessible neighborhoods, with strategic growth in developed areas also being of importance. A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complementary Districts Participants were asked about building height preferences in each of the three named districts (Downtown, Midtown, and University) and responses were quite varied. In Downtown, height preferences ranged from a maximum of three stories to a maximum of thirty stories with five to seven being the most common answer. In Midtown, height maximums ranged from three stories to thirty with the most common again between five and seven stories. Responses for height preferences in the University district had the same results as Midtown and Downtown. In remaining areas of the City, the preferred height limit was much lower, typically up to three stories with several comments stating that five story developments are appropriate. More mixed-use areas are desired within Bozeman along with strategic preservation of trees, open space, and wetlands. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Encouraging mixed-use development • Expanding public transportation • Reducing car-dependency • Promoting commercial activity near the university • Locating affordable housing developments in Midtown • Defining additional districts on the west and northeast parts of Bozeman Responses to the questionnaire indicated that multimodal connectivity between districts, and diversity in housing and employment opportunities were the two most exciting components of this theme. A City Influenced by Our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Space Over 94% of respondents indicated they live within a ten-minute walk of a park or open space. Of those 94%, 67% said that they walk to local parks or open space multiple times a week. Connecting existing trail systems, along with expanding the trail systems in the west side of Bozeman were frequently mentioned as important components of this vision. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Researching sustainable funding options for Bozeman’s green spaces • Increasing density in the city core • Improving pedestrian safety • Continuing partnerships with the Gallatin Valley Land Trust, Trust for Public Land, and others • Creating more stringent development requirements that emphasize trail connectivity Responses to the questionnaire showed an equal level of interest in natural environment protection regulations, open space acquisition, and climate change impact considerations. A City Engaged in Regional Coordination Responses showed a strong desire to protect wetlands, floodplain, wildlife habitat, and key corridors for north/south wildlife migration. Additionally, limiting sprawl, promoting sustainable practices, and preserving agricultural land were mentioned. Participants also stated that greater 190 A-8 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES coordination between the City and regional authorities is needed in relation to transportation, water, sewer, growth management, and more. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Increasing public engagement efforts • Expanding education and training sessions for elected officials • Restoring and naturalizing regional waterways • Coordinating planning efforts and documents Questionnaire responses showed a substantial interest in the efficient use of land and thoughtful expansion of the City’s area. A City that Prioritizes Mobility Choices 46% of participants said that they have used public transit in the past year. For those that have not used public transit, reasons comprised of: long commute times using public transit; inconvenient scheduling; and lack of bus stops. For those that are that said they are employed, 46% drive a car, 30% ride a bike, 17% walk, and 6% work from home, and only 1% use public transit. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Funding winter maintenance of trails and paths • Enhancing traffic calming measures • Developing protected bike-paths along main roads • Establishing more east-west connections • Promoting safe pedestrian access to all public schools • Increase funding for alternative transit options (bus, bicycle, walking) • Researching the feasibility of an affordable airport shuttle • Creating connectivity requirements for new development Questionnaire respondents chose safe and functional walking and biking and interconnected systems as the most exciting aspects of this theme. A City Powered by its Creative, Innovative, and Entrepreneurial Economy Low wages and rising housing costs are seen as the largest deterrents for those starting a business in Bozeman, due to the difficulty for prospective employees to live in town. The high quality of life in Bozeman, its excellent location, and Montana State University are seen as some of the most attractive reasons why a business would locate here. When asked about additional opportunities to fulfill this vision, responses included: • Increasing minimum wage within the City • Reducing regulatory restrictions on small businesses Support for local companies and growing from within, as well as economic diversification were chosen as the most exciting components of this theme. 191 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 A-9 PHASE FOUR | DRAFT + FINAL PLAN The final phase in the Community Plan Update process was conducted over the course of several months to ensure community awareness, satisfaction, and acceptance of the Plan. Community comments provided throughout the first three phases were incorporated into this final Plan which includes specific goals, objectives, and designated indicators that measure success of each goal. COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE 1 | SUMMARY NOTIFICATION The Community Open House was publicized through television; at updates to the City Commission and Bozeman Planning Board; direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part of this process; and social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter accounts. PURPOSE Each step in the Community Plan update process is built to collect a greater level of detail than the previous step, through thought provoking questions and exercises. The purpose of the Open House was to present Future Land Use Categories and Maps to the public for feedback. Public input and comments will be integrated into the final Community Plan. EVENT The Community Open House took place at the Bozeman City Hall Commission Room on Thursday, October 17th, between 4 and 6pm. Members from City staff provided summaries of the draft Future Land Use Categories, and presented the Future Land Use Map (shown to the right). Participants were asked to assess whether the Future Land Use Categories match the needs of the community, and to provide input on the Future Land Use categories’ spatial placement in the City. Meeting participants wrote their answers to three main questions about the categories on white boards. Approximately 73 people attended the event. COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE 2 | SUMMARY NOTIFICATION The Community Open House was publicized through television; at updates to the City Commission and Bozeman Planning Board; direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part of this process; and social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter accounts. PURPOSE The purpose of the Open House was to present the initial public draft of the Community Plan including Future Land Use Categories and Maps to the public for feedback. Public input and comments will be integrated into the final Community Plan. EVENT The Community Open House 2 took place at the Bozeman City Hall Commission Room on Tuesday, December 3rd, between 4 and 6pm. Members from City staff were available to answer questions on the text of the plan, provided summaries of the draft Future Land Use Categories, presented the Future Land Use Map, and metrics for success. Approximately 20 people attended the event. PUBLIC HEARINGS | SUMMARY NOTIFICATION The City conducted multiple public hearings to share and receive information from the community prior to making a decision on whether or not to adopt the draft Community Plan. The public hearings were publicized through television; through newspaper articles and paid advertisements; posting dates on the project website; at updates to the City Commission and Bozeman Planning Board; direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part of this process; and social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter. 192 A-10 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES PURPOSE The purpose of the public hearing is the formal opportunity for community participation in the adoption process. Public hearings are required by state law prior to any final decision by the Planning Board or the City Commission. Public input and comments were considered and many were integrated into the final Community Plan. EVENTS After developing the document draft for public review the Planning Board held three public hearings on July 21st, July 28th, and August 10th, 2020. The Planning Board considered the draft document, heard and considered public comments, and made several revisions to the map and text. On August 17th the Planning Board formally passed Resolution 20-1 transmitting the recommended document to the City Commission. On August 18th the City Commission was formally presented the Planning Board’s recommended document and the subsequent review process was outlined. The City Commission formally passed a resolution of intent to adopt a growth policy on August 25, 2020. Adoption of the Resolution of Intent is the formal initiation of the City Commission’s review. To help encourage public understanding of the document and participation in the public review process the City hosted three online workshops to present aspects of the plan and answer questions. There were 116 attendees at the three workshops. Recordings of the workshops were posted on the project website so those not able to attend could still obtain the information. • Sept 16 - Public work session 1 focused on text of Plan with Q&A. • Sept 23 - Public work session 2 focused on future land use with Q&A. • Sept 30 - Public work session 3 focused on overall Plan and open Q&A. On October 6, 2020 the City Commission conducted their first work session and public hearing on the draft. They asked questions, heard public comments, and suggested possible revisions for consideration at their following meeting. On October 20th the City Commission held their second work session and public hearing. After considering a staff presentation and public comments the Commission directed several amendments to be included in a revised draft of the growth policy. On November 17, 2020 the City Commission conducted their final public hearing. After consideration of all matters and public comment they adopted Resolution 5133 adopting the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. PURPOSE The purpose of the public hearing is the formal opportunity for community participation in the adoption process. Public hearings are required by state law prior to any final decision by the Planning Board or the City Commission. Public input and comments will be considered and may be integrated into the final Community Plan. EVENT [A list of all public hearings will be created and included in the final draft of the document]. 193 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-1 INFRASTRUCTURE + SPECIAL TOPIC PLANS STRATEGY FOR DEVELOPMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT OF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE. The City of Bozeman actively manages its infrastructure. In 2018 alone, the City performed 27,442 maintenance operations. During 2015-2019, the City invested $107,206,000 in expansions and upgrades to its water, sewer, streets, and stormwater systems. In the upcoming five years the City’s Capital Improvement Program anticipates an expenditure of $126,913,000 for the same four programs. The City prepares facility plans to evaluate current conditions, consider future needs, identify future locations and sizing for needed construction, and maximize operational effectiveness and efficiency. B 194 B-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES Facility Plans presently in place include: • 2017 Fire Master Plan • 2007 Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails • 2017 Transportation Master Plan • 2008 Stormwater Master Plan • 2015 Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan • 2017 Water Facility Plan • 2013 Integrated Water Resources Plan • 2013 Transportation Safety Plan The planning area for each facility plan generally matches the planning area for this growth policy. Minor mismatches do occur at fringe locations. Over time, these will be corrected as each plan is updated and matched to the growth policy boundary. The water plans rely on geographical features and facilities located well outside of the land use planning area. This is reflective of the realities of watershed operation. Each plan contains analysis of existing and future needs. For detailed evaluation of each facility please consult the appropriate facility plan. A summary is provided later in this Appendix. Some facilities, such as transportation, address the demands placed by many thousands of daily commuters and of persons passing through the community. Others, like stormwater, primarily address needs by residents. A comparison of individual plans will therefore show differences in the size of anticipated service populations now and in the future. For a generalized discussion of existing conditions please see Appendix B and for generalized future needs please see Appendix D. Collectively, these plans provide an infrastructure plan that meets the requirements of 76-1-601(3)(c) (v) and (4)(c), MCA. The City has a highly robust web presence to share infrastructure information. Using web viewers, anyone can see existing and future infrastructure. They can select individual segments to obtain basic information on age, size, and type. This greatly facilitates infrastructure management and design by both public and private parties to upkeep and expand systems. MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT City staff conduct daily maintenance and operations on all facilities and local services. Local services are all services provided by the City for the benefit of citizens and visitors. These services include, but are not limited to, police, fire, water, recreation, streets, parks, libraries, wastewater, and solid waste collection and disposal. Daily maintenance is supported by the annual budget funded by the taxes and fees assessed for services. The City’s adopted budgeting principles commit to adequate maintenance and orderly replacement. Operational expenses from the water, sewer, sanitation, and stormwater functions are paid by the monthly service fees assessed to users of the service. Maintenance of streets is primarily funded by a city-wide special district that is billed with the semi-annual property tax bills. Where appropriate, special improvement districts help reconstruct some local streets. Parks is presently supported by the general fund but creation of a special district may be voted on in the spring of 2020. For a more extensive discussion of budgeting and accounting principles, individual operations, and expenditures please see the most current City budget. The City maintains a substantial inventory of various facilities including, but not limited to: • 287.7 miles of water main • 2,656 fire hydrants • 231.2 miles of sewer main • 9 sewer lift stations • 109.6 miles of stormwater mains • 98.6 miles of stormwater urban waterways • 215.1 miles of City maintained streets with an overall network of 286.1 miles • 1,025.4 acres of City park • 82.2 miles of trails • 50 playgrounds Each facility element is entered into the City’s robust asset management software, Cityworks. The City has received three awards for its asset management program. These are: 195 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-3 • 2008 Special Achievement in Geographic Information Systems • 2013 Exemplary Cityworks User • 2017 Special Achievement in Geographic Information Systems The characteristics of each item are included in the asset management program as well as its geographic location. This asset list enables departments to consider age, condition, and other factors to determine when maintenance or replacement is required. There are adopted standards for expected service life of each type of facility. The City includes maintenance concerns in its design process and standards. The operating departments prepare budget requests each year to provide needed funding to replace deficient items or those reaching the end of their service life. Substantial projects become part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) which provides public disclosure of substantial projects. The City has found that adequate maintenance reduces the frequency of required replacement is less expensive over the long run. INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT The facility plans look forward to construction of additional infrastructure needed to service an expanding City. Each considers where new work can best be located. Most facilities operate as networks of connections and therefore, placement of one new improvement can facilitate further expansion or improve function of existing work. The water, sewer, and transportation plans specifically identify needed improvements to expand or upgrade service in areas not currently annexed to the City. The facility planning process provides an essential opportunity to coordinate between plans and agencies. As the City considers extensions of sewer and water it enable a change in land use from rural to urban uses. The City prioritizes identification of larger scale facilities such as collector and arterial streets. Local service items such as local streets and minimum sized water mains are most effectively designed during the land development process when greater information on uses is available. The City has established design standards and performance standards for all levels of infrastructure. These standards guide the individual project designer during preparation of development applications. The City uses a Capital Improvement Program system to plan for major projects over a five year period. The facility plans provide the basic material from which to construct the CIP, having identified major needed projects to service an expanded city. The CIP is updated annually through a public process. This provides transparency in City operations and enables participation by the public in decision making. Individual projects are identified, benefits and costs are described, funding sources are assigned and an overall picture of the revenue needed to construct the projects is determined. The CIP process ensures that a longer term vision of the community’s development is always considered in prioritizing individual projects for construction. The annual update enables the City to be responsive to changing conditions including needs identified for proposed development. It is expected that the City will become part of a new Metropolitan Planning Organization [MPA] during the effective period of this plan. An MPO is a federally required multi-community organization for areas over 50,000 in population that supports multi-jurisdiction coordination in transportation planning and road development. As described in Theme 6 the City is committed to Regional Coordination and will take many different actions to participate in shared decision making. The Gallatin Triangle Planning Study in 2014 documented 10 different types of formal interlocal cooperation tools in place in the valley. In 2016, the City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County established the Planning Coordinating Committee to provide a forum for exchange of information and discussion regarding common 196 B-4 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES issues of land use and development. The City and County staff regularly communicate on operations issues. Additional interlocal agreements will be adopted as needed to formalize coordination. The City does not extend municipal services outside of its boundaries. Therefore, development desiring access to water or sewer service must first annex. This policy enables a clear delineation in service provision and supports a rational expansion of infrastructure. All services within the City are provided by the City. Services outside the City are provided by another government agency. The City of Bozeman and Gallatin County are presently developing an interlocal agreement to document long standing informal agreements on annexation and development; and to establish a new agreement on how development occurs within the planning area but not yet ready for annexation. The City hopes to extend its boundaries incrementally and avoid unannexed areas surrounded by the City. Such inholdings complicate efficient delivery of service and can cause difficulties with extensions of utilities. SUMMARY OF PLANS Per the growth policy statute 76-1-601(2)(e), MCA, this element must include at a minimum: “a strategy for development, maintenance, and replacement of public infrastructure, including drinking water systems, wastewater treatment facilities, sewer systems, solid waste facilities, fire protection facilities, roads, and bridges.” This statement does not mean that a fully developed capital improvements plan must be included in the growth policy. The public facilities element in the growth policy is intended to be more general and includes a summary of past completed public facility projects. INTEGRATED WATER RESOURCES PLAN – SEPTEMBER 2013: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=836 In 2012-2013 the City of Bozeman developed an Integrated Water Resources Plan to guide its water supply and water use policy and practices for the next 50 years. The Plan’s purpose was to project the City’s water demand decades into the future, examine the potential means to meet the demand, and recommend the most promising measures for further study or implementation. Recommendations include making a vigorous water conservation program the cornerstone of the City’s water management, as well as acquiring additional water rights, conducting feasibility studies for water source optimization, and more. Long-term recommended actions include constructing one or more impoundments on Sourdough Creek above the treatment plant, developing a new well field to supply the city, and to work with the owners of the “Salar Project” to develop a well field or impoundment. Recommended ancillary activities to supplement the short, medium, and long term actions include: continuous public engagement related to this process and water resource possibilities, developing a plan to address conveyance loss of Hyalite Reservoir Water, monitor creeks to better understand water yields and hydrographs. This plan was followed by the Integrated Water Resources Implementation Plan in December of 2013. This plan provides additional detail on how the recommendations adopted within the IWRP would be implemented. Included in the plan are tables that list specific tasks and their subsequent implementation highlights and milestones. 2008 STORM WATER FACILITIES PLAN – MAY 2008: HTTP:// WEBLINk.BOzEMAN.NET/WEBLINk8/0/DOC/46890/ELECTRONIC. ASPX The 2008 Storm Water Facilities Plan was developed in response to Bozeman’s rapid growth and development. The Plan outlines seven goals, which include; Inventory the Existing System; Plan for Future Growth; Evaluate Existing Problem Areas; Storm Water System Analysis; NPDES Permit Application and Implementation; Financial Plan; Recommended Plan. The most significant recommendations from the Plan were: moving forward with establishing a funding source for storm water, guidance for development of a uniform approach to development submittals, and 197 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-5 continuing to rely upon development-based storm water management until the Phase 2 program and creation of a utility are more advanced. BOzEMAN TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN – APRIL 2017: HTTPS://MDT.MT.GOV/PUBLICATIONS/DOCS/BROCHURES/BOzEMAN_ TRANPLAN_STUDY.PDF The Bozeman Transportation Master Plan (TMP) serves as a guide for development of and investment in the community’s transportation systems in a comprehensive manner. The TMP was developed through a collaborative approach with city and state staff, elected officials, and local residents and provides the blueprint for a transportation system that will serve the community’s citizens well into the future. The TMP provides for guiding transportation infrastructure investments based on system needs and associated decision-making principles. The Plan incorporates all applicable background information, includes detailed analysis of options and alternatives, incorporates meaningful input from citizens and local officials, and provides a framework for future efforts within the context of State and Federal rules, regulations, and funding allocations. This comprehensive plan identifies community goals and improvements to the transportation infrastructure and services within the city of Bozeman and that portion within Gallatin County that is likely to include future urban area expansion. The Plan addresses regional transportation issues, overall travel convenience, traffic safety, sustainability, complete streets, funding, transportation demand management (TDM), and multi-modal connections. The Plan includes recommendations for short- term improvements as well as recommended modifications and capital improvements to major roadways. The Plan also includes policy suggestions to align with the community’s vision for the Bozeman area. BOzEMAN COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION SAFETY PLAN – JULY 2013: HTTPS://WWW.MDT.MT.GOV/PUBINVOLVE/BOzEMANCTSP/ DOCS/BOz_CTSP_FINAL_07_2013.PDF The Bozeman Community Transportation Safety Plan (CTSP) was developed as the City began working to reduce the number of severe injury crashes in the urban area. A Transportation Safety Advisory Committee (TSAC) was established and they identified three focus areas to reduce fatal and incapacitating crashes in Bozeman: inattentive driving crashes, lack of occupant protection usage, and bicycle and pedestrian crashes. The Plan is focused on strategies that could reduce severe injury crashes with these contributing circumstances. These strategies are accompanied by guidance on their implementation, including action steps, stakeholder groups involved, leaders, and resources. The plan used crash data provided by the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) and worked with a consultant to facilitate planning meetings and to develop materials. This plan emphasized implementation of these efforts as its most important component. Many of the identified strategies involve little or no cost, and can be implemented quickly. 2015 WASTEWATER COLLECTION FACILITIES PLAN UPDATE – JUNE 2015: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/ SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=832 The Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan Update is an update to the City’s previous document, guided by the intent to update and evaluate the City’s existing wastewater collection system, and to estimate and plan for future expansion based on current population and land use trends. The main goals of the Plan are: define and evaluate the existing infrastructure in order to determine capacity and existing flows, estimate location and nature of future population growth and associated increases in wastewater quantities, and to develop a comprehensive plan to address deficiencies and meet present and future requirements, while continuing to plan for and accommodate the City’s growth. Recommendations are made related to: updates to the City’s wastewater database, flow monitoring, capacity increases, existing system, 198 B-6 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES future system, and policies. 2017 WATER FACILITY PLAN – JULY 2017: HTTPS://WWW. BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=4977 The Water Facility Plan contains information on the City’s three water supplies, treatment and distribution system, and future construction needed to provide continued quality service to a growing community. The City recently replaced its water treatment plant to address both demand for additional capacity and more strict regulatory standards. Climate change and its associated impacts pose a challenge to Bozeman’s water supply and the City is undertaking conservation and efficiency efforts based upon the recommendations of the plan. This plan replaces the 2007 water facility plan. DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN – JANUARY 2017: HTTPS://WWW. BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=4791 The Drought Management Plan is designed to maximize available water supplies and reduce water use during times of shortage and provide guidelines the City of Bozeman will use to manage water supply and water use during drought. The guidelines are designed to maintain the health, safety, and economic vitality of the community; to avoid adverse impacts to public activity and quality of life for the community; and to consider individual customer needs as much as possible to the greatest extent possible in the face of water shortages. Because each drought is different, it is not practical to develop a set of hard-and-fast rules to apply to all droughts. Rather, these guidelines are intended to provide a framework for timely drought response while maintaining flexibility to respond to unique drought conditions. These guidelines are intended to assist the Bozeman City Commission (the Commission) in making decisions throughout the course of a drought. The Commission may adjust or refine the response based on actual drought conditions. The Plan is based on an analysis of Bozeman’s climate and available water supplies, a review of other drought plans from across the United States and lessons learned from past drought events in communities throughout the Western United States. As this is the City of Bozeman’s first Drought Management Plan, it will be updated regularly to ensure that it addresses current conditions and will be administered by the City of Bozeman’s Public Works Division (Bozeman Water). 199 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-7 PARkS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS (PROST) PLAN – DECEMBER 2007: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/ SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=3284 The Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails (PROST) Plan provides a comprehensive look at recreation needs in Bozeman. The PROST Plan was prepared by the Bozeman Recreation and Parks Advisory Board with the assistance of City staff and includes an inventory of existing facilities, forecasts needed facilities, and proposes policies to carry out the plan. In general, this plan provides a framework for integrating existing facilities and programs and further developing a system of parks, recreation facilities and programs, open spaces, and trails. Additionally, the plan is used for evaluating grant applications, public funding expenditures, and influencing the preparation of individual park master plans. FIRE & EMS MASTER PLAN – AUGUST 2017: HTTPS://WWW. BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=5495 This analysis includes a thorough review of the organization structure, training, performance measures, prevention activities, and interactions with mutual aid partners. Specifically, the Center for Public Safety Management, LLC (CPSM) was tasked with providing recommendations and alternatives regarding fire department operations, staffing levels, and alternative modes of operation referencing both the current service demand and options that can position the department to best manage the community’s anticipated growth. Forty-two recommendations were included in the Plan and are derived from industry best practices. These recommendations are listed in five categories; I. Organization, Management and Personnel; II. Facilities and Capital; III. Planning and Risk Management; IV. Operations, Dispatch and V. Deployment; Training and Prevention. There is a page reference after each recommendation which indicates the page of the report on which the recommendation is found. BOzEMAN CLIMATE ACTION PLAN – DECEMBER 2020: HTTPS:// WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/CITY-PROJECTS/BzN-CLIMATE-PLAN The Bozeman Climate Action Plan (CAP) reaffirms and expands past commitments made in the 2011 Community Climate Action Plan and in a 2017 resolution to uphold the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement through local action. The plan’s vision and guiding principles will advance innovative solutions to cultivate a more equitable and resilient low-carbon community for current and future generations. The recommendations in the CAP delivers a robust set of 16 innovative, actionable solutions organized into six focus areas: Healthy, Adaptive and Efficient Buildings; Responsible and Reliable Renewable Energy Supply; Vibrant and Resilient Neighborhoods; Diverse and Accessible Transportation Options; Comprehensive and Sustainable Waste Reduction, and; Regenerative Greenspace, Food Systems, and Natural Environment. Each solution includes a suite of supporting actions that ultimately help Bozeman achieve its climate vision and goals. URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT PLAN – FEBRUARY 2016: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=3621 The Bozeman Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) aims to sustainably and efficiently manage Bozeman’s urban forest and to illustrate the full expanse of benefits urban trees can provide. This plan focuses on finding the most cost-effective ways to accomplish these goals in Bozeman. The City of Bozeman and the public have given the urban forest in Bozeman more attention and priority in recent years, resulting in more effective management and an increase in the maintenance of public trees. This plan emphasizes strategies to maximize the benefits the urban forest provides, ranging from the environmental, psychological, sociological, and economic areas. The UFMP contains three major components: Tree Infrastructure, Management of the Urban Forest, and Community Engagement. These three components work together to build the most 200 B-8 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES efficient urban forest in Bozeman. The UFMP presents the most cost-effective management possible, yet it preserves the existing canopy cover, substantially grows canopy, and maximizes benefits. Every opportunity to “do more with less” is stressed in this plan, and the budget recommendations will result in greater overall efficiency while gaining a remarkable return on investment. This plan represents an impartial overview of the current structure and offers a management strategy that focuses on increasing work productivity while addressing issues related to risk and liability ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY UPDATE – NOVEMBER 2016: HTTP://WEBLINk.BOzEMAN.NET/WEBLINk8/0/DOC/120846/ ELECTRONIC.ASPX The Economic Development Strategy Update (EDS) includes an economic profile of Bozeman, highlighting population and employment growth patterns, industry clusters (photonics, IT, tourism, etc.), and the key strategies to expand Bozeman’s economic base, support local businesses, and enhance regional connections. Additionally, the document compares Bozeman to other communities, and to itself through a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis, and outlines the process and survey results gathered in the development of the EDS. Within the EDS, three economic development pillar strategies are defined, including: Support retention and a mechanism to drive economic development; and Support education and workforce development initiatives to provide businesses with qualified workers. The specific actions and metrics that follow the development pillar strategies are proposed with the acknowledgement that they are flexible, due to the ever-changing nature of the economy. As new opportunities arise, the document may be revised. This document should be updated every three to five years to stay current and provide the most up- to-date recommendations. COMMUNITY HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT – FEBRUARY 2019: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=8773 The Community Housing Needs Assessment (CHNA) provides an updated housing needs assessment of the City of Bozeman. It is part one of a two-part process that is intended to help the City of Bozeman understand and devise a plan to address the housing needs of residents and the workforce. The goal is to ensure that the City has the housing necessary to support a thriving community, through housing to support businesses, economic development, and community vibrancy. The report evaluates the spectrum of housing needs in the City, providing an overview of special needs programs and emergency housing options, as well as affordable rentals through home purchase opportunities. COMMUNITY HOUSING ACTION PLAN – OCTOBER 2019: HTTPS:// WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=9443 The Community Housing Action Plan (CHAP) was completed in October of 2019 and is an action plan guided at identifying Bozeman’s top community housing priorities and designing a plan to get housing built for a range of resident and employee needs in Bozeman over, at minimum, a five-year span. NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT REPORT – 2015: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/ SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=5513 The City of Bozeman established the Neighborhood Conservation Overlay District (NCOD) in 1991 as a locally-adopted zoning district that prioritizes conservation of neighborhood character and preservation of historic properties. The boundary was initially based on the City’s 1957 census boundary. The boundary does not necessarily reflect the historical integrity of structures either adjacent to, within or outside the boundary. Substantial reinvestment has occurred in the NCOD area over 24 years as Bozeman has grown significantly since 1991. Therefore, the City evaluated the NCOD and what recommendations were needed to update the district and its 201 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-9 associated regulations. The City is also conducting evaluations and revisions of land development standards which interact with this report. Some recommendations from the draft report have been removed as they have already been completed. Best practices were studied from six communities across the country, along with three cities in Montana to determine what unique preservation nor infill strategies could be implemented in Bozeman. The analysis concluded that the NCOD has affected affordable housing, infill development and the historical integrity of properties within the district. The District has had several successes including preserving potential historical buildings, creating historic districts, and preserving neighborhood context in certain areas. However, the NCOD has also had challenges including affordable housing and application of design guidelines and code enforcement. Recommendations are listed for each focus area and in some instances these recommendations are in conflict with each other. This was done on purpose to encourage the public and City Commission to determine what is the most critical aspect moving forward whether it be affordable housing, historic preservation, infill development, or creating new design guidelines. However, a preferred set of recommendations is provided that tries to achieve a balance between the four focus areas. It should be noted that these can and will likely change pending input from City Commission on what direction the NCOD should take moving forward. DESIGN AND CONNECTIVITY PLAN FOR NORTH 7TH AVE CORRIDOR - OCTOBER 2006: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/ SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=556 This plan should serve as a formal policy document related to improvements along North 7th Avenue. It should be used when planning improvements along the corridor, and as a means for recruiting businesses in the area. In addition it should serve as a roadmap for private property owners, investors, and individual businesses in planning individual projects, such that they will help to reinforce the overall vision for the area. The purpose of this plan is: To provide a design framework plan for improvement projects along the corridor that will enhance connectivity for the pedestrian, bicyclist and automobile; To illustrate the vision for the plan; To provide implementation strategies and funding mechanisms. DOWNTOWN BOzEMAN IMPROVEMENT PLAN – MAY 2019: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=9041 The 2019 Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan (the DBIP) builds on Bozeman’s planning history and recent energy. A successful downtown contains a diverse mix of uses, encourages interaction, and creates unique experiences that cannot be duplicated. Downtown’s success is tied to its strong sense of place, which has been strengthened in recent years by a healthy economy, a careful balance of tourism with local livability, and a clear framework for investment laid out in the 2009 Downtown Improvement Plan. Yet, as Bozeman grows, Downtown cannot be content with today’s successes; evolution is necessary for long-term resilience. Challenges do exist, particularly around keeping Downtown’s local identity intact, balancing growth sensitively, and welcoming more transportation modes and residents. This plan has been shaped by many people in the Bozeman community who worked hard to create an inspired vision for the next decade. This plan is guided by five main principles: The Heart of a Thriving Bozeman; More than Main Street; Walkable and Accessible; Welcoming to Everyone; Connected to Nature and Culture. Within the plan are public engagement summaries, up-to-date statistics, suggested code amendments, and a memorandum related to the market analysis. CEMETERY MASTER PLAN (SUNSET HILLS) – JUNE 2017: HTTPS:// WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=5408 This twenty-year plan outlines short-term policy considerations related to the management, physical grounds, and general environment of the 202 B-10 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES Sunset Hills Cemetery; and the long term planning for perpetual care of the future Sunset Hills Cemetery. DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PARkING MANAGEMENT PLAN – JULY 2016: HTTPS://WWW.BOzEMAN.NET/HOME/ SHOWDOCUMENT?ID=1762 This plan reflects an overall evaluation of the downtown parking system. The evaluation entailed review of existing parking operations and assets, previous study findings, and municipal code; in-depth discussions and three topic-specific work sessions with the Bozeman Parking Commission (BPC); and six public forums to allow for community input and discussion. From this process, the consultant developed a comprehensive parking management plan that responds to the unique environment, goals, and objectives of Downtown Bozeman. Within the plan are policy, organizational, code-related, and parking management action strategies. MIDTOWN ACTION PLAN – AUGUST 2017: HTTPS://WWW. MIDTOWNBOzEMAN.ORG//UPLOADS/DOCUMENTS/ACTION- PLAN-V10.PDF The intent of this Plan is to attract targeted private investment by leveraging the market potential of the Midtown District, and removing barriers to development through strategic infrastructure investments and incentives. This is especially important for this District as the city does not own any property and is reliant on cooperation and collaboration with property owners to realize the vision for this area. GALLATIN COUNTY HAzARD MITIGATION AND COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN – JUNE 2019: HTTPS://WWW.READYGALLATIN. COM/WP-CONTENT/UPLOADS/2019/07/FINAL-DRAFT- GALLATIN-COUNTY-HAzARD-MIT-PLAN_07-05-2019_PLUS- MSU-ANNEX-CWPP.PDF The City participates in disaster and response planning on a cooperative basis with other local governments. In 2000 the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) began a pre-disaster program. This required every county in the nation to prepare an all-risk assessment and mitigation plan for any anticipated natural disaster (i.e. flooding, earthquake, winter storm, wildfires). The City Fire Department provides the staffing for the Gallatin County Disaster and Emergency Services function under an Interlocal agreement. The County and the five municipalities jointly prepared a Hazard Mitigation Plan which was completed in 2006, 2012, and 2018. The plan examines a wide range of possible emergency circumstances or events. Each event is rated for likelihood of occurrence, breadth of impact, and resources needed to respond. After the 2000 fire season in the United Stated, it was evident that something must be done to better prepare and protect communities and residents that live in or near forested lands. The National Fire Plan was developed in August 2000, following a landmark wildland fire season, with the intent of actively responding to severe wildland fires and their impacts to communities while ensuring sufficient fire fighting capacity for the future. In Montana, the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management has worked with the Montana Department of Commerce to award grants to communities for the development of community fire plans. The Healthy Forests Initiative (HFI) was launched in August, 2002 with the intent to reduce the risks severe wildfires pose to people, communities, and the environment. By protecting forests, woodlands, shrub lands, and grasslands from unnaturally intensive and destructive fires, HFI helps improve the condition 203 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 B-11 of our public lands, increases firefighter safety, and conserves landscape attributes valued by society. The Bozeman Fire Department, cooperation with Gallatin County and the other fire service providers prepared a local plan for wildfire which made recommendations to the local governments. This plan meets the requirement for a growth policy to delineate the wildland-urban interface and make recommendations regarding regulations. Implementation occurs through other actions such as subdivision regulations. This plan has multiple but basic objectives. These objectives are as follows: 1. Identify and prioritize current WUI areas within and around each of the 19 fire districts and departments to include adjacent public lands. 2. Identify potential areas that are currently under development or in planning stages within these fire districts and fire service areas. 3. Identify local fire protection resources. 4. Provide detailed mapping of Gallatin County, fire departments, and WUI areas 5. Inform and educate public and private land owners of hazardous or potentially hazardous WUI areas. 6. Provide ideas and recommendations for possible hazard mitigation in high risk areas. 7. Continue to bring local, state, federal, and interested party decision makers to the table for future planning and education.  TRIANGLE COMMUNITY PLAN - AUGUST 2020: HTTPS:// GALLATINCOMT.VIRTUALTOWNHALL.NET/SITES/G/FILES/VYHLIF606/F/ UPLOADS/TRIANGLE_COMMUNITY_PLAN_FINAL.PDF The Triangle Community Plan is a joint effort between the City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County to establish shared priorities for land management. The area of the plan is generally bounded by western Bozeman, southern Belgrade, and south of the Four Corners area. The plan sets a shared vision, values, and key issues and goals and implementation steps to address those issues. The Triangle Community Plan is a formally adopted neighborhood plan under the growth policies for Gallatin County and City of Belgrade. It was not formally adopted by the City as part of the growth policy but is a recognized plan of the City. 204 205 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-1 INVENTORY REPORT This Appendix includes the history of Bozeman and additional demographic data that was not included in the main body of the Community Plan. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Prior to the establishment of permanent settlements in southwestern Montana, a variety of nomadic Native American bands frequented and utilized the region now known as the Gallatin Valley. Archeological evidence documents that prehistoric peoples enjoyed the Valley’s once-plentiful natural resources for more than 10,000 years. Later, members of the Bannock, Blackfeet, Crow, Flathead, Gros Ventres, Shoshone, and several other historic tribes seasonally camped in the well-watered region en route to and from the buffalo hunting grounds to the east of the Bridger Mountains. Meriwether Lewis arrived at the Three Forks of the Missouri River on July 28, 1805. Lewis described C 206 C-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES the Gallatin Valley as “a smooth extensive green meadow of fine grass in its course meandering in several streams...and a distant range of lofty mountains ran their snow clad tops above the irregular and broken mountains which lie adjacent to this beautiful spot.” Nearly one year later, William Clark’s expedition, with the navigational assistance of Sacajawea, a Bannock/Shoshone Indian, ascended the Gallatin River and observed: “several leading roads which appear to a gap in the mountains,” which is now known as Flathead Pass. At the recommendation of his native guide, Clark traveled east through what later became known as Bozeman Pass, eventually making his way to the Yellowstone River drainage and beyond. Thanks in large measure to the lavish descriptions of the Lewis and Clark Expedition; others were soon attracted to southwestern Montana. Fur trappers harvested in the region until the 1850s, when local beaver populations had been substantially depleted. The first permanent white settlements in the vicinity, however, were established following the discovery of gold in Bannock, Virginia City, and Last Chance Gulch between 1862 and 1865. John Bozeman and others guided immigrant trains along the infamous Bozeman Trail, which entered the Gallatin Valley via Bozeman Pass. Perceiving the economic potential of having a community at the mouth of this important gateway, John Bozeman and two friends – Daniel Rouse and William Beall – planned a town site directly west of the opening. Possessing exceptionally fertile and well- watered soil, as well as geographic proximity to several nearby mining camps that provided a ready market for goods and services, Bozeman, Montana, became one of the earliest and most successful agricultural communities in the Rocky Mountain West. Early resident William Alderson described the community’s surroundings as “one of the most beautiful and picturesque valleys the eye ever beheld, abounding in springs of clear water, flowers and grass in abundance.” In sharp contrast to many other more arid regions of the West, this comparatively fruitful local environment served as a powerful magnet for settlement and economic development. As Alderson’s diary noted, for example, farmers came to the Bozeman area “expecting to make money,” and most were not disappointed. The draw of the Gallatin Valley was strong enough that by September of 1864, The Montana Post reported that the area was “being fast settled up with farmers, many of whom came to Montana as a better class of miners and after...quitting their original pursuits secured 160 acres of land on which they...go to work in true farmer fashion.” Valley residents soon marketed potatoes, beets, carrots, rutabagas, and parsnips in the mining camps they had formerly occupied. Soon, focus had expanded to include the cultivation of wheat, oats, and barley; and the roots of an extensive agricultural industry in the region were planted. Thanks to the safety guaranteed by the nearby establishment of Fort Ellis in August of 1867, the town of Bozeman grew quickly, becoming the county seat that same year.Corps of Discovery arrives in Gallatin ValleyGallatin City establishedFort Ellis established southeast of BozemanNorthern Pacific Railroad comes to Bozeman/ City of Bozeman incorporatedCollege of Agricultural & Mechanical Arts establishedFirst Sweet Pea FestivalStock Market crashNorthwest Airlines makes first landing at Gallatin FieldInterstate highway comes to Bozeman180518621867188318931906192919471966207 Historical Perspective Appendix A: Background Information Possessing exceptionally fertile and well-watered soil, as well as geographic proximity to several nearby mining camps that provided a ready market for goods and services, Bozeman, Montana, became one of the earliest and most successful agricultural communities in the Rocky Mountain West. Early resident William Alderson described the community’s surroundings as “one of the most beautiful and picturesque valleys the eye ever beheld, abounding in springs of clear water, flowers and grass in abundance.” In sharp contrast to many other more arid regions of the West, this comparatively fruitful local environment served as a powerful magnet for settlement and economic development. As Alderson’s diary noted, for example, farmers came to the Bozeman area “expecting to make money,” and most were not disappointed. The draw of the Gallatin Valley was strong enough that by September of 1864, The Montana Post reported that the area was “being fast settled up with farmers, many of whom came to Montana as a better class of miners and after...quitting their original pursuits secured 160 acres of land on which they...go to work in true farmer fashion.” Valley residents soon marketed potatoes, beets, carrots, rutabagas, and parsnips in the mining camps they had formerly occupied. Soon, focus had expanded to include the cultivation of wheat, oats, and barley; and the roots of an extensive agricultural industry in the region were planted. Thanks to the safety guaranteed by the nearby establishment of Fort Ellis in August of 1867, the town of Bozeman grew quickly, becoming the county seat that same year. Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1868 Following the prevailing economic stagnation of the 1870s, the Northern Pacific Railroad desperately sought local markets and natural resources to help offset the huge costs of its transcontinental expansion. Eventually, the Gallatin Valley’s established reputation as “the granary of Montana,” together with its proximity to Bozeman Pass and the large coal reserves of the neighboring Trail Creek area, attracted the attention of the railroad. On January 9, 1882, the Northern Pacific purchased a large tract of land located northeast of Bozeman from Perry and William McAdow and began construction of a six-stall, masonry roundhouse to accommodate helper engines for pushing eastbound trains over Bozeman Pass–the highest point on the railroad. In a matter of months, Bozeman became the first town on Montana’s Northern Pacific line. Page A-2 Bozeman Community Plan CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-3 Following the prevailing economic stagnation of the 1870s, the Northern Pacific Railroad desperately sought local markets and natural resources to help offset the huge costs of its transcontinental expansion. Eventually, the Gallatin Valley’s established reputation as “the granary of Montana,” together with its proximity to Bozeman Pass and the large coal reserves of the neighboring Trail Creek area, attracted the attention of the railroad. On January 9, 1882, the Northern Pacific purchased a large tract of land located northeast of Bozeman from Perry and William McAdow and began construction of a six-stall, masonry roundhouse to accommodate helper engines for pushing eastbound trains over Bozeman Pass–the highest point on the railroad. In a matter of months, Bozeman became the first town on Montana’s Northern Pacific line. Although Bozeman was unusual in that it did not owe its life to the railroad, the Northern Pacific dramatically changed the Gallatin Valley, even prior to its arrival there. Until the coming of the railroad, the Valley’s commerce with the rest of the nation was possible only by freighter – south to Corinne, Utah, on the Union Pacific Railroad, or North to Fort Benton, Montana, on the Missouri River. Thus, following confirmation that the railroad would traverse the Valley on its trek to the West Coast, local anticipation reached a fevered pitch. Area farmers and ranchers, many of whom had become painfully aware of the economic disadvantages of their geographic isolation from eastern population centers, perceived the railroad as nothing less than the key to progress for the Bozeman area. Almost immediately, local expectations were fulfilled as railroad optimism sparked a prolonged redefinition of the region’s character, appearance, and quality of life. Confident that the railroad’s arrival would spark a major building and settlement boom in Bozeman, Nelson Story and local partners Walter Cooper and John Dickerson platted Park Addition, one of the largest subdivisions on Bozeman’s affluent southern side. The East Side (later Hawthorne) School at 114 North Rouse, the Masonic Lodge at 137 East Main, the Lamme Building at 29 East Main, and the Spieth and Krug Brewery at 240-246 East Main were constructed in 1883. The City of Bozeman was incorporated later that same year in celebration of the fact that the region was no longer circumscribed by the Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1868 208 C-4 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES limitations of geographic isolation. “We may now feel that we are part of the great world’s business activities,” proclaimed Judge H.N. Maguire. And, indeed, to many local residents the possibilities seemed endless. As is the case in other communities, the advent of the Northern Pacific marks a watershed in the developmental history of the Gallatin Valley. With the railroad’s assistance, Bozeman rapidly moved toward economic and demographic stabilization. Population in the Bozeman area increased dramatically from 867 in 1880 to approximately 3,000 in 1883. “Under the impetus of the near approach of the track of the Northern Pacific road,” the Avant Courier reported, “Bozeman has doubled its population during the past year.” The arrival of the railroad also impacted the ethnic composition of the City’s population. Construction of the railroad resulted in an influx of Chinese workers. In 1870 there were 4 Chinese-born residents of Bozeman and by 1910 that number had swelled to 62. There we also a few African- American families in Bozeman, many of which moved West during the Civil War. By the time of the 1910 Census there were 38 African Americans residing in Bozeman. During the late 1800s Native Americans sometimes camped near the fledgling City. While they did not reside in the City, they did come to town for trade and supplies. The establishment of Yellowstone National Park in 1872, combined with the completion of the railroad line through Bozeman, was also an economic boon for Bozeman. Bozeman became the main point of departure for park-bound visitors. The importance of Yellowstone National Park to the local economy expanded even more with the use of private automobiles. The ongoing transformation sparked by the railroad boom was truly remarkable. Fred M. Wilson, traveling correspondent for the Helena Herald, reported that “Bozeman has indeed made a proud record during the past twelve months. Her wonderful growth, resulting from the advent of the iron horse…has exceeded the anticipations of the most sanguine. Business houses have nearly doubled in number, large and handsome houses now cover tracts of land which a few years ago were beyond the limits of town, the streets are thronged with a busy, hungry crowd, and one who has been absent but a season finds difficulty in recognizing the staid and sober town of the past in the bustling, ambitious city of the present.” While the effects of the railroad boom quickly subsided and local population levels actually declined in the mid-1880s, Montana’s attainment of statehood in 1889 served as the impetus for yet another pivotal surge in local development. In an effort to impress Montana voters enough to choose Bozeman as the site of the state capital in an 1892 special election, area promoters set out to redefine their community. Local residents erected several prominent public and private buildings in the years immediately following the declaration of statehood, including the impressive Bozeman City Hall and Opera House (1890), the gothic-styled Saint James Episcopal Church (1890-91) at 9 West Olive Street, the Victorian Commercial Bozeman Hotel (1891-92) at 307-21 East Main Street, and the gothic City High School building (c. 1892) which once occupied the present site of the Emerson Cultural Center at 111 South Grand Avenue. Several notable local residences, such as the Julia Martin House (1892) at 419 South Grand Avenue, were also constructed in this period. In addition to these ambitious projects, Bozeman also witnessed other significant steps toward sophistication between 1889 and 1892. Community boundaries were officially extended into surrounding farmlands in an effort to make the City look larger on paper than it was in actuality and, therefore, more impressive to Montana’s voters. In a further effort to make Bozeman appear ready for the capital designation, the “Capitol Hill Addition” was platted in 1890, and South Eighth Avenue was laid out as a boulevard leading up to the intended site of the capitol. Electric lights 209 Historical Perspective Appendix A: Background Information While the effects of the railroad boom quickly subsided and local population levels actually declined in the mid-1880s, Montana’s attainment of statehood in 1889 served as the impetus for yet another pivotal surge in local development. In an effort to impress Montana voters enough to choose Bozeman as the site of the state capital in an 1892 special election, area promoters set out to redefine their community. Local residents erected several prominent public and private buildings in the years immediately following the declaration of statehood, including the impressive Bozeman City Hall and Opera House (1890), the gothic-styled Saint James Episcopal Church (1890-91) at 9 West Olive Street, the Victorian Commercial Bozeman Hotel (1891-92) at 307-21 East Main Street, and the gothic City High School building (c. 1892) which once occupied the present site of the Emerson Cultural Center at 111 South Grand Avenue. Several notable local residences, such as the Julia Martin House (1892) at 419 South Grand Avenue, were also constructed in this period. In addition to these ambitious projects, Bozeman also witnessed other significant steps toward sophistication between 1889 and 1892. Community boundaries were officially extended into surrounding farmlands in an effort to make the City look larger on paper than it was in actuality and, therefore, more impressive to Montana’s voters. In a further effort to make Bozeman appear ready for the capital designation, the “Capitol Hill Addition” was platted in 1890, and South Eighth Avenue was laid out as a boulevard leading up to the intended site of the capitol. Electric lights were installed on the City’s main thoroughfares in 1891, and an extensive local streetcar system was established the following year. The Northern Pacific Railroad also constructed a brick passenger depot at 829 Front Street in 1892. By September of 1892 – less than two months before the special election to settle the capital question – a regional promotional magazine, The Rockies, boasted that the Gallatin Valley possessed the economic stability of “the largest and most productive agricultural region in the entire northwest.” Bozeman, in particular, was praised as having “every convenience found in eastern cities of ten times its population.” Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1893 Despite this and other bold efforts at self-promotion, when the ballots were counted in 1892, Bozeman took fourth place with 7,636 votes, behind Butte, Anaconda, and Helena with 7,757, 10,147, and 14,032 Page A-4 Bozeman Community Plan CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-5 were installed on the City’s main thoroughfares in 1891, and an extensive local streetcar system was established the following year. The Northern Pacific Railroad also constructed a brick passenger depot at 829 Front Street in 1892. By September of 1892 – less than two months before the special election to settle the capital question – a regional promotional magazine, The Rockies, boasted that the Gallatin Valley possessed the economic stability of “the largest and most productive agricultural region in the entire northwest.” Bozeman, in particular, was praised as having “every convenience found in eastern cities of ten times its population.” Despite this and other bold efforts at self- promotion, when the ballots were counted in 1892, Bozeman took fourth place with 7,636 votes, behind Butte, Anaconda, and Helena with 7,757, 10,147, and 14,032 votes respectively. Although a great deal of time and effort went into Bozeman’s bid for the capital, local residents were not discouraged following their defeat. The Bozeman Weekly Chronicle positively asserted that “the capital contest has been the means of attracting a great deal of favorable attention to Bozeman and the money spent is by no means wasted.” The paper’s emphatic outlook was soon justified. Within a year, Helena got around to allocating other state institutions, among which were the units of the higher education system. Due no doubt in part to Bozeman’s impressive growth during its bid for the capital, the College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts was located in Bozeman on February 16, 1893 – the first of the units to be established. The school opened in April of that year and classes were held in the local skating rink, where Holy Rosary Church is now located. When the legislature finally appropriated the necessary funds, Montana or “Old Main” Hall was built in 1896 and the foundation of what is now Montana State University was laid. The advent of dry land farming techniques, which were aggressively promoted by the new agricultural college, coupled with an ongoing homestead boom, dramatically increased Bozeman’s population from 3,419 in 1900 to 5,107 in 1910. These demographic changes, in turn, reaffirmed Bozeman’s advantageous position as a regional supply center, inspiring numerous Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1893 210 Appendix A: Background Information Historical Perspective votes respectively. Although a great deal of time and effort went into Bozeman’s bid for the capital, local residents were not discouraged following their defeat. The Bozeman Weekly Chronicle positively asserted that “the capital contest has been the means of attracting a great deal of favorable attention to Bozeman and the money spent is by no means wasted.” The paper’s emphatic outlook was soon justified. Within a year, Helena got around to allocating other state institutions, among which were the units of the higher education system. Due no doubt in part to Bozeman’s impressive growth during its bid for the capital, the College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts was located in Bozeman on February 16, 1893 – the first of the units to be established. The school opened in April of that year and classes were held in the local skating rink, where Holy Rosary Church is now located. When the legislature finally appropriated the necessary funds, Montana or “Old Main” Hall was built in 1896 and the foundation of what is now Montana State University was laid. The advent of dry land farming techniques, which were aggressively promoted by the new agricultural college, coupled with an ongoing homestead boom, dramatically increased Bozeman’s population from 3,419 in 1900 to 5,107 in 1910. These demographic changes, in turn, reaffirmed Bozeman’s advantageous position as a regional supply center, inspiring numerous changes in the architectural character of the community. As early as 1907, a surplus of hard milling wheat was, for the first time, available for shipment to markets outside of Montana. This reality prompted the Chicago, Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railroad to gain access to Bozeman in 1911–a development that further bolstered the local agricultural economy. Bird’s eye view of Bozeman, circa 1900 The volume of agricultural and railroad activity in the Valley continued to intensify during the 1913­ 1929 Progressive era thanks in large measure to the growth of Montana State College’s Agricultural Experiment Station–which encouraged the application of “industrial principles to agricultural expansion.” In advocating the scientific management of farming, the Agriculture Experiment Station also promoted crop diversification; and, following 1911 soil tests, 17,000 acres of peas were planted in the Valley. The obvious success of the experiment, coupled with the fact that legume cultivation was a natural soil enricher and pea vines could be used as animal fodder, stimulated the development of four local seed pea companies. The incredible success of Bozeman’s seed pea industry stimulated the incorporation of the Bozeman Canning Company on North Rouse Avenue. Soon the Gallatin Valley was producing seventy­five percent of the seed peas raised in the United States and Bozeman was Bozeman Community Plan Page A-5 C-6 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES changes in the architectural character of the community. As early as 1907, a surplus of hard milling wheat was, for the first time, available for shipment to markets outside of Montana. This reality prompted the Chicago, Milwaukee and Saint Paul Railroad to gain access to Bozeman in 1911–a development that further bolstered the local agricultural economy. The volume of agricultural and railroad activity in the Valley continued to intensify during the 1913 1929 Progressive era thanks in large measure to the growth of Montana State College’s Agricultural Experiment Station– which encouraged the application of “industrial principles to agricultural expansion.” In advocating the scientific management of farming, the Agriculture Experiment Station also promoted crop diversification; and, following 1911 soil tests, 17,000 acres of peas were planted in the Valley. The obvious success of the experiment, coupled with the fact that legume cultivation was a natural soil enricher and pea vines could be used as animal fodder, stimulated the development of four local seed pea companies. The incredible success of Bozeman’s seed pea industry stimulated the incorporation of the Bozeman Canning Company on North Rouse Avenue. Soon the Gallatin Valley was producing seventy-five percent of the seed peas raised in the United States and Bozeman was referred to as the “Sweet Pea Capital of the Nation.” The industry thrived in the Gallatin Valley until the mid-1950s, employing hundreds of local residents, particularly women. Drought conditions prevailed throughout the 1920s, but Gallatin County fared relatively well in comparison to other counties in eastern Montana. The community also reaped the rewards of an active tourist economy during the era as thousands of pleasure seekers flooded through area train stations. With the advent of the automobile, Bozeman’s role as a gateway to Yellowstone National Park became even more pronounced; and, for the first time, recreational tourism began to rival agriculture as a major industry in the area. Due largely to the established relationship between agricultural pursuits and the Valley’s two transcontinental railroads, the Bozeman area survived the Great Depression better than most, and continued its historic precedent of Bird’s eye view of Bozeman, circa 1900 211 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-7 economic expansion throughout its 1930-1950 Nationalization Phase of Development. Like other places across the nation, Bozeman faced many challenges following the Stock Market Crash of 1929; but, for the most part, the town of nearly 7,000 fared comparatively well. Local newspaper headlines on January 1, 1930 optimistically proclaimed: “All signs point toward continuance of prosperity…Nothing in the present situation that is menacing or pessimistic…Agriculture in better condition than ever.” Several factors contributed to this positive outlook. As in years past, an abundance of water in the region caused agriculture in the Gallatin Valley to flourish at a time when most farmers and ranchers were ravaged by natural disasters and financial ruin. Drought-stricken cattle from other regions were brought into the Bozeman area. By 1932, local dairy farmers were constructing a $25,000 cooperative creamery that was expected to double the farm population of the County. The success of the local farm economy is further evidenced by the development of the Gallatin Valley Auction Yards and Vollmer slaughterhouse complex in the mid-1930s. When Montana’s economy was at its lowest point, Bozeman also witnessed a new relationship with the federal government, which further bolstered the local economy. While drought conditions continued to hinder agricultural pursuits and forced many Montana counties to seek federal assistance during the Depression years, many area farmers and related businesses, such as the Montana Flour Mills Company, profited by providing flour and cereal products for Roosevelt’s New Deal assistance programs. Flourishing agribusiness, coupled with the presence of MSC’s Agricultural Extension Service, made Bozeman the principle actor in Montana’s New Deal farm policy activity and underscored Bozeman’s role as the de facto capital of rural Montana. Thanks in large measure to its growing role in New Deal Farm policy, as well as the fact that many unemployed students were flocking to Bozeman, Montana State College expanded dramatically during the period, having obvious ripple effects on the town and its built environment. In 1932, MSC had 1,056 students, many of whom were attracted to Bozeman because they could not find jobs. By 1939, student population had jumped nearly sixty percent to 1,801 students. This dramatic increase helped to further bolster Bozeman during the worst years of the Great Depression and generated increasing opportunities for local housing and business development. While Bozeman’s population actually decreased during the era of the Great Depression, dropping from 8,855 in 1930 to 8,665 in 1940, construction activity in the City continued to grow. In 1932, for example, the total value of local building permits was a less than impressive $98,883. By 1940, the total building permit valuation had grown more than four times to $428,780, a solid indication that local growth and development accelerated toward the end of the decade. As expected, Bozeman’s economy continued to expand, especially after the bombing of Pearl Harbor in December of 1941. Mechanisms were already in place to provide the nation’s armed forces with locally produced agricultural commodities, such as flour, wool, and meat. Major local employers, such as Montana Flour Mills and the Bozeman Canning Company, operated at maximum capacity during the era. Throughout WWII, and for more than a century after, the Bozeman Armory Building was home to Charlie Company and the 163rd Infantry Regiment of the Montana National Guard. This Guard unit drew members from all over the state. The Armory Building was dedicated just 4 months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. The end of the war and the return of veterans brought ever-increasing activity to Bozeman. The effects of the 1944 G.I. Bill of Rights stimulated further growth at the college and in the housing industry. Local responses to shortages in housing supply prompted the development of wood 212 Appendix A: Background Information Historical Perspective As expected, Bozeman’s economy continued to expand, especially after the bombing of Pearl Harbor in December of 1941. Mechanisms were already in place to provide the nation’s armed forces with locally produced agricultural commodities, such as flour, wool, and meat. Major local employers, such as Montana Flour Mills and the Bozeman Canning Company, operated at maximum capacity during the era. Throughout WWII, and for more than a century after, the Bozeman Armory Building was home to Charlie Company and the 163rd Infantry Regiment of the Montana National Guard. This Guard unit drew members from all over the state. The Armory Building was dedicated just 4 months after the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1940 The end of the war and the return of veterans brought ever-increasing activity to Bozeman. The effects of the 1944 G.I. Bill of Rights stimulated further growth at the college and in the housing industry. Local responses to shortages in housing supply prompted the development of wood product industries such as the Idaho Pole plant, which was established in 1946, and the pulpwood industry, started at Gallatin Gateway in 1947. Together these and other developments helped ensure the continuing expansion of Bozeman and its institution of higher learning, Montana State College. In the years immediately following World War II, the major factors influencing Bozeman’s earlier development continued to exert an important influence on Bozeman’s character and appearance. The agricultural heritage that had shaped daily life in the Gallatin Valley from day one continued to play a major role, as evidenced by the establishment of the Winter Fair in 1946. Likewise, the ever-growing Montana State College remained the largest local employer and continued to ensure the economic Bozeman Community Plan Page A-7 C-8 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES product industries such as the Idaho Pole plant, which was established in 1946, and the pulpwood industry, started at Gallatin Gateway in 1947. Together these and other developments helped ensure the continuing expansion of Bozeman and its institution of higher learning, Montana State College. In the years immediately following World War II, the major factors influencing Bozeman’s earlier development continued to exert an important influence on Bozeman’s character and appearance. The agricultural heritage that had shaped daily life in the Gallatin Valley from day one continued to play a major role, as evidenced by the establishment of the Winter Fair in 1946. Likewise, the ever-growing Montana State College remained the largest local employer and continued to ensure the economic vitality of the community. But even as these historic forces continued to shape the growth of the area, a succession of new technological and transportation-related developments further linked Bozeman with the outside world and profoundly altered local life in the coming decades. Radio, television, and Hollywood soon wedded the Gallatin Valley with the broader culture of the nation. As music and other mass-produced popular amusements were instantly made available to area residents for the first time, local values and aspirations changed. More than ever, Bozeman youth embraced the possibility of leaving the Gallatin Valley for more sophisticated pastures. Meanwhile, others discovered the Bozeman area. Northwest Airlines made its first landing at Gallatin Field on June 22, 1947, and for the first time, commercial plane service conveniently connected the Gallatin Valley with the rest of the world. Like Main Street in Bozeman, circa 1940 213 the railroads, airlines further encouraged tourism and the more recent phenomenon of living in Bozeman and working elsewhere. In 1966 the interstate highway was completed through the Bozeman area. Prior to this time, all east-west traffic coming through the area traveled down Main Street. With the completion of the interstate, however, Main Street was bypassed–a transition which had dramatic economic impacts for Downtown Bozeman and paved the way for modern day strip development on Bozeman’s periphery. Together with already existing transportation systems, the interstate and airlines triggered Bozeman’s emergence as a nationally recognized recreational mecca. Yellowstone Park and dude ranch tourism flourished in the summer months; and with the establishment of Bridger Bowl (1955) and later Big Sky (1973), a year-round tourism industry was established. With growing frequency, the fertile farmland of the Gallatin Valley was subdivided for residential development to accommodate a burgeoning local population. Between 1960 and 1970, Bozeman’s City limits almost doubled in area, from 2,640 acres to more than 5,000. Many subdivision proposals were brought before the Bozeman City Commission, which in turn increased from three to five members in 1970 to handle the heavier workload. That year, Bozeman’s first City-County planner was hired. Despite brief declines, population in the Bozeman area increased during the last thirty years. From 1971 to 1975, the number of Bozeman residents increased four to five percent. Even more pronounced growth was witnessed in the area immediately adjacent to the City limits. Within a four-and-a-half mile radius from the City limits, population jumped eighteen percent during the period, with four thousand acres of farmland turned into housing tracts. Between 1980 and 1990, Gallatin County’s population increased another 17.7 percent to 50,463. During the next five years, the County’s population grew again to 59,406, with an average annual increase of 3.4 percent, the highest increase in Montana. Between 1980 and 1990, Bozeman’s population grew a healthy 4.7 percent. During the early 1980s, as Bozeman prepared for its centennial as an incorporated City, efforts were undertaken to survey the town’s historic and architectural resources. Under the direction of paid and volunteer professionals, more than eighty local residents documented roughly 4,000 properties in Bozeman’s historic core. Since that time, nine historic districts containing more than eight hundred buildings, as well as an additional forty individual landmarks, have been listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Under these development pressures, farming in the Bozeman area has steadily declined. Local agribusiness has been increasingly supplanted by new economic stimuli – especially recreational tourism and real estate development. In 1950, 1,129 farms and ranches dotted the Gallatin Valley. By 1992 that number had dropped to 798. Between 1978 and 1992 alone, Gallatin County saw a 21.3 percent decrease in acreage devoted to farmland, according to the United States Census of Agriculture. In the five-year period between April of 1993 and April of 1998, an estimated 9,230 acres were developed in the Gallatin Valley and outside the City limits of Bozeman. The start of the ongoing boom in Bozeman’s growth and development roughly coincides with the making of Robert Redford’s A River Runs through It in 1992. The movie’s imagery and story line had a tremendous impact in popularizing western Montana as “The Last Best Place” and, likewise, affiliated the region with a simpler, recreation-oriented quality of life, which now epitomizes the local mindset. The movie also promoted the rapid expansion of the region’s fly- fishing industry, which further advanced the local tourist economy. CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-9 214 Appendix A: Background Information Historical Perspective number had dropped to 798. Between 1978 and 1992 alone, Gallatin County saw a 21.3 percent decrease in acreage devoted to farmland, according to the United States Census of Agriculture. In the five-year period between April of 1993 and April of 1998, an estimated 9,230 acres were developed in the Gallatin Valley and outside the City limits of Bozeman. North 7th Avenue, circa 1970 The start of the ongoing boom in Bozeman’s growth and development roughly coincides with the making of Robert Redford’s A River Runs through It in 1992. The movie’s imagery and story line had a tremendous impact in popularizing western Montana as “The Last Best Place” and, likewise, affiliated the region with a simpler, recreation-oriented quality of life, which now epitomizes the local mindset. The movie also promoted the rapid expansion of the region’s fly-fishing industry, which further advanced the local tourist economy. With the advent of the Internet, fax machines, and other high-tech means of communication, Bozeman has attracted increasing numbers of residents who live in the Gallatin Valley but work elsewhere. Studies during the 1990s confirmed that, despite unparalleled population and economic growth in the area, more than forty percent of local residents were employed elsewhere. Telecommuters, retirees, and the independently wealthy were settling in the Gallatin Valley, creating increased demands for local services and lower-paying service industry jobs. Thus, despite an apparently booming local economy, Gallatin County residents averaged $17,032 in annual wages during the 1990s and ranked thirty-third among Montana’s fifty-six counties in per capita income. Due to the City’s continued economic expansion, the annual average wage in the City had increased to $28,901 in 2005, and ranked eleventh among Bozeman Community Plan Page A-9 C-10 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES With the advent of the Internet, fax machines, and other high-tech means of communication, Bozeman attracted increasing numbers of residents who live in the Gallatin Valley but work elsewhere. Studies during the 1990s confirmed that, despite unparalleled population and economic growth in the area, more than forty percent of local residents were employed elsewhere. Telecommuters, retirees, and the independently wealthy were settling in the Gallatin Valley, creating increased demands for local services and lower-paying service industry jobs. Thus, despite an apparently booming local economy, Gallatin County residents averaged $17,032 in annual wages during the 1990s and ranked thirty-third among Montana’s fifty-six counties in per capita income. Due to the City’s continued economic expansion, the annual average wage in the City had increased to $28,901 in 2005, and ranked eleventh among Montana’s counties in annual average wage earned per capita. The larger concern now is the rapid increase in the cost of living – and specifically the cost of housing – in the City relevant to increases in wages and per capita income. Recent data from the US Census Bureau shows that median household income is approximately $46,000 and the median home price was $398,000 as of August 2017. According to the EPS report, a household needs to earn at least $68,400 annually to afford a home in Bozeman at the 30 percent of income affordability standard. As the 2018 Economic and Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS) Report states, “Bozeman has a level of economic diversity and strength that exceeds many other small western cities, especially those that are not part of a larger metropolitan region.” North 7th Avenue, circa 1970 215 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-11 A key component of Bozeman’s healthy local economy has been the establishment of many high-tech businesses in the Gallatin Valley. Providing generally higher wages, these clean industries are widely regarded as examples of desirable economic development that is in many ways compatible with the much-cherished natural amenities that southwest Montana offers to its residents and visitors. The local economy has also been fueled in recent years by the construction industry and businesses that support that industry such as building supplies, banking and financial services, and landscaping material suppliers and installers. EPS found that in-migration, or those moving from other areas made up a significant part of the City and County’s population increase. Job growth has increased as well, but according to EPS, nearly half of all new jobs created from 2010 through 2016 paid less than $16.00 per hour ($34,000 per year). In an already competitive and high-cost housing market, low-paying job growth could likely increase the demand for more affordable and attainable housing development in the community. The community continues to be interested in high quality development that protects and reflects Bozeman’s unique character. Bozeman possesses many of the qualities people seek in the communities where they live and work. These include: clean air, good schools, access to recreational activities, low crime, and an attractive downtown. These amenities will continue to attract people to our community. The challenge is accommodating growth and change while protecting the very qualities that brought people to Bozeman. Main Street, 2019 216 C-12 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES EXISTING CONDITIONS The following information can be found in the 2018 Demographic and Real Estate Market Assessment developed by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS). Population and demographic details can change quickly. The US Census Bureau annually conducts the American Community Survey (ACS) which provides updated information about community trends. Those seeking the most current information are to be directed to the ACS. The 2020 US Census will provide the most comprehensive information. http://weblink.bozeman.net/WebLink8/0/ doc/204534/Electronic.aspx (EPS Report) POPULATION GROWTH Bozeman is one of the fastest growing places in the nation. Between 2000 and 2016 the City added approximately 17,000 new residents, which translates to a growth rate of nearly 1,100 new residents per year or an annual growth rate of 3.0 percent. While regional population growth slowed during the Great Recession between 2008 and 2010, it has quickly surpassed pre-recession levels. Growth rates since 2014 have averaged approximately 4.7 per year or roughly 1,800 new residents per year, leading to an estimated 2016 population of 45,250. The Gallatin Valley is evolving from a rural to a more urban region. The surrounding communities, such as Belgrade and unincorporated areas in Gallatin County, have also experienced significant growth. The Gallatin Valley (a roughly 10-mile east and south to 15-mile west distance of Bozeman, depending on topography) has a population of approximately 100,000 people. Every 10 years, the U.S. Census updates the urbanized and metropolitan area designations, defined as areas with more than 50,000 people and a population density in a core area of at least 1,000 people per square mile. Based on the region’s growth, the Gallatin Valley may be designated as an urbanized area in 2020. This designation may make the region eligible to form a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) to carry out regional transportation planning and to receive federal transportation planning and construction funding. HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS Approximately 43 percent of the Gallatin County population resides in Bozeman. Bozeman is also the economic hub of the County and represents approximately 77 percent of total County employment. The median household income in Bozeman is nearly $46,000 per year, which is lower than the countywide average of approximately $55,500. Some of the differences are attributed to the large student population in Bozeman which brings down the median. When income figures are examined for renters and owners, Bozeman’s household income is more similar to countywide figures. Owner households in Bozeman have a median household income of $68,000 compared to the County median of $71,000. Just outside of Bozeman in the unincorporated area, there are neighborhoods with large high-end homes and luxury ranches where household incomes are higher. The presence of Montana State University directly impacts the general demographics of Bozeman. Incomes, the average age, and average household size in Bozeman are all lower than the County as a whole. In addition, the proportion of renter households is significantly higher than in the rest of the County. AGE DISTRIBUTION The population of Bozeman is younger when compared to the County and State. The median age in Bozeman is 27.2 compared to a median age of 33.2 in Gallatin County and 39.9 in Montana. The primary driver of this is the large number of students attending MSU. The proportion of the total population between the age of 20 and 24 in Bozeman is 21.1 percent compared to 7.2 percent in Montana. Bozeman also has a higher proportion of people between 217 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-13 the ages of 25 and 39 compared to Montana, due to the large number of students that remain in the area following graduation and the appeal of the City to those in the early stages of their careers. HOUSING The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines a household as being “cost burdened” when it is paying 30 percent or more of its income to rent or mortgage payments. In Bozeman, 22 percent of owner households are paying more than 35 percent of their income in rent and nine percent are paying between 30 and 35 percent. For renters, 44 percent are paying more than 35 percent of their income to rent. Another eight percent pay between 30 and 35 percent of their income in rent. Unfortunately, the Census does not allow us to differentiate between students and the resident employee population. Nevertheless, this is a large proportion of cost- burdened households. As of August 2017, the median home price in Bozeman was $398,000, up from $245,000 as the recovery from the Great Recession began with annual appreciation rates over 10 percent per year over the past five years. To afford the median priced home in Bozeman at the 30 percent of income affordability standard, a household needs to earn at least $68,400 per year or $32.00 per hour for one earner. The median household income for owner households is currently about $68,000 indicating that overall home prices are still in line with incomes at this broad statistical level. These figures however do not account for the quality of the housing available at this price. In addition, it is the rapid increase in home values that people are experiencing especially since wages in incomes have not kept pace with housing cost increases . Home prices in Belgrade, Livingston, and Three Forks have also increased at 10 to 12 percent per year over the same time period. Living in outlying areas may reduce amounts paid for housing, but increases transportation costs that may offset much of the perceived cost savings of locating outside of Bozeman. EMPLOYMENT Bozeman continues to be the economic hub of the region with approximately 77 percent of total Gallatin County employment. While Gallatin County employment has historically been concentrated in Bozeman, the growth in the technology and outdoor industries in the late 1990s accelerated this trend. This concentration of high-tech employment in Bozeman has also translated to a high number of startups in the City. Since 2005, Bozeman has captured roughly 80 percent of total employment growth in the County. This means that for every 10 jobs created in Gallatin County, eight were in Bozeman. From 2005 through 2014, employment growth in Education and Health Services, and Leisure and Hospitality represented approximately 65 percent of the total job growth that occurred in Bozeman. Employment in Construction and Information both experienced contraction in total employment. While many service related jobs have surpassed their pre-recession levels there are others, such as Information that have experienced a slower recovery and have not fully recovered to their pre- recession levels. RETAIL Retail located in Bozeman serves the City population of 49 ,000 plus the Gallatin Valley with another 60,000 people, and outlying areas of Southwest Montana. At least a third of retail sales in Bozeman are estimated to come from outside this Gallatin Valley local trade area from Southwest Montana and from visitors/ tourists. The city’s trade area has however shrunk since Walmart, Costco, and Target located in Helena several years ago. With the contraction in the retail market due to the growth of e-commerce, there are fewer opportunities to expand retail. In addition, demographic changes are favoring less retail consumption and a shift to the food and beverage 218 C-14 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES market. Most of the national ‘ big box’ retailers that are still active and expanding are already present in Bozeman-such as Costco, Walmart, Lowes, Home Depot, Target, and Kohl’s. Thus, there are few other store chains left that would expand to Bozeman. Looking further out however, new stores and concepts do appear in the market from time to time, and Bozeman will be an attractive location for them. However, we do not expect the demand for these types of sites and properties to increase substantially over the next 10 years. It is likely that as Belgrade and other surrounding communities grow, they will reach a large enough size and support their own retail base at least for community-serving retail (less so for regional retail). Given that there is no sales tax in Montana and therefore not a large fiscal benefit to siting new retailers - and that Bozeman already has the largest share of the regional retail market - retail development and recruitment does not need to be a priority for the City. OFFICE SPACE Gallatin County added over 1,600 jobs in professional services since 2005, with at least 80 percent of that occurring in Bozeman. Similarly, Bozeman accounted for 80 percent of the total office construction in Bozeman, Belgrade, and Four Corners combined. There is demand for office space, but it is difficult for the market to respond. The bulk of the market is small firms looking for about 1,000 to 5,000 square feet. Building large speculative office buildings is therefore risky due to the large number of tenants needed to fill a building. Building smaller buildings is costlier as some costs decrease per square foot with larger buildings. Land and construction costs in Bozeman require high rents (over $20.00 per square foot) to make an office building financially feasible, which is high for small local businesses. INDUSTRIAL SPACE Over past 16 years, the Greater Bozeman market added 1.9 million square feet of industrial space. Over half of this was in Belgrade and nearly 40 percent was in the Four Corners area. Bozeman captured only 10 percent of the industrial market. The land consumptive nature of many industrial uses coupled with land values and development costs dictate that Bozeman is no longer competitive for many larger heavier industrial uses. 219 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-15 PHYSIOGRAPHY GEOLOGY AND STRUCTURE The Gallatin Valley is near the southern border of the northern Rocky Mountains physiographic province and is part of the Three Forks structural basin. This structural basin is one of the high intermountain basins that are characteristic of this province. The Three Forks structural basin was probably formed in pre-Oligocene time. In the Oligocene and Miocene time, there was either a continuation of down-faulting along one or more of the basic boundaries or a down warping of the basin. During the formation of the basin, through-drainage was interrupted and many hundreds of feet of sediments, derived from the adjoining highlands and from falling volcanic ash, were deposited under lacustrine and terrestrial conditions. These Tertiary strata constitute most of the valley fill. Resumption of through-drainage in late Tertiary time resulted in extensive erosion of these materials. A mantle of alluvium was deposited in much of the basin during Quaternary time. The Bridger Range, a high linear mountain range that bounds the Gallatin Valley on the east, extends from Bridger Creek to the head of Dry Creek. The mountains are composed of rocks ranging in age from Precambrian to Cretaceous. The Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks strike north- northwest, parallel to the axis of the range. They dip steeply to the east and in places are overturned to the east. Several high- angle thrust faults transect the Bridger Range. Most of them have an eastward trend. Normal faulting along the west side of the Bridger Range is believed to have elevated the range with respect to the valley. Available subsurface information indicates that a fault system exists along the front of both the Bridger and Gallatin Ranges. The mountains of the Gallatin Range are composed of Precambrian gneiss and some infaulted blocks of Paleozoic and Mesozoic rocks. The rocks are tightly folded and severely crumpled in places; yet, a general east-west trend is recognizable. The Gallatin River Canyon separates the Madison Range on the west from the Gallatin Range on the east. Structurally, however, the two ranges are segments of the same mountain unit. This unit bonds the Gallatin Valley on the south. The Tertiary strata in the Gallatin Valley form a homocline that dips from one to five degrees in a general direction of the Bridger Range. HYDROLOGY Bozeman and Gallatin County are crossed with numerous creeks and irrigation canals. Most of the creeks flow from the southeast to northwest to the Gallatin River. Major creeks and rivers within the planning area include: • East Gallatin River, in the northeastern portion of the City and planning area; • Bozeman (Sourdough) Creek, flowing south to north through the City and joining with Rocky Creek to form the East Gallatin River. Bozeman Creek has been channelized and rerouted into a storm pipe as it flows through the center of town; • Nash Spring Creek, Matthew Bird, and Figgins Creeks in the southern portion of the City of Bozeman; • Hyalite Creek, southwest of the City; • Rocky Creek, flowing northwest along the Interstate through the northeast sections of the City of Bozeman, and joining with Bozeman Creek to form the East Gallatin River; • Bridger Creek, flowing west from Bridger Canyon, into the East Gallatin River; • Baxter Creek and Aajker Creek, flowing south to north, through the western part of the City; and • East and West Catron Creeks, flowing south to north, through the middle of the City. Groundwater is another abundant resource in the Gallatin Valley. Generally, groundwater is near the surface, and flows from south to north to the 220 C-16 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES East Gallatin River. Locally high water tables of less than ten feet below the surface are prevalent throughout the valley. Groundwater aquifers are recharged through many sources. Recharge is received from infiltration from the many rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches. In addition, faults located along the mountain fronts aid in recharge by distributing the rain and snow runoff along their corridors. The future quality and quantity of groundwater is uncertain. Changes in agricultural irrigation patterns in the Gallatin Valley, prolonged drought, and increases in residential and landscaping irrigation will all impact groundwater resources. The quality of groundwater resources may also be in jeopardy due to the proliferation of on-site septic systems. WEATHER AND CLIMATE The weather and climate of the Bozeman area is a significant factor to consider when planning for park and recreation facilities and programs. The weather impacts a wide-range of considerations such as: • The scheduling of warm verses cold weather recreation programs • Maintenance of park and recreational facilities, which varies seasonally • Installation of vegetation, new equipment, parking lot improvements, etc. • Provision of seasonal activities such as ice skating/hockey and Nordic skiing in the winter and outdoor swimming and tennis in the summer Bozeman is located at an elevation of 4,793 feet above sea level. The average growing season is 107 days. The MSU weather station recorded that 23.75 inches of precipitation fell during 2018 which was 5.08 inches above average and the eighth wettest year on record. SAND AND GRAVEL RESOURCES Bozeman rests on an alluvial plain. As a consequence, sand and gravel are widely present within the planning area. Many areas are not available for extraction due to other uses covering the surface or the presence of significant buried infrastructure. Relocating such uses or infrastructure would not be financially feasible. The majority of commercial sand or gravel operations serving Bozeman are located outside the planning area. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality reviews and issues permits for commercial sand and gravel mining. Removal of gravel in order to create ponds or incidental to other activities does not require a DEQ permit or review. Table a-1: average TemperaTures in FahrenheiT scale by monTh – 1892 Through 2016 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Maximum Temperature 31.7 35.5 42.7 53.9 63.0 71.6 81.4 80.3 69.4 57.6 42.2 33.6 55.2 Minimum Temperature 12.0 15.3 21.4 30.4 38.4 45.2 51.1 49.5 41.2 32.9 22.2 14.5 31.2 Source: Montana State University Station, Montana Climate Summaries, Western Regional Climate Center. Table a-2: average precipiTaTion in inches by monTh Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Total Precipitation 1892-2016 0.87 0.73 1.34 1.89 2.89 2.91 1.35 1.24 1.70 1.54 1.12 0.88 18.48 Total Snowfall 1948-2016 12.6 10.2 15.7 13.1 4.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.8 5.8 11.6 11.9 86.0 Snow Depth 1931-2016 5 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 Source: Montana State University Station, Montana Climate Summaries, Western Regional Climate Center. 221 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 C-17 Removal of sand and gravel can have substantial impacts to groundwater, air quality, adjacent owners, public streets, and other interests. Establishment of new or expanded extraction operations should be carefully reviewed and adequate mitigation provided for identified negative impacts. SOCIOECONOMICS Bozeman has five economic segments that make it unique and create both opportunities and challenges. HIGHER EDUCATION Montana State University is one of the primary economic anchors in the City of Bozeman. In 2016, the University had a student headcount of 16,440. Since 2009, the rate of growth in the number of students grew at just under four percent per year, which is significantly higher than the historical growth rate since 1990, which was closer to one percent per year. While this rate of growth may not be maintained over the long-term, the University will continue to be a major driver in the local economy. The University also employs roughly 3,100 employees and has $514 million in annual operations spending. The vast majority of operations spending is paid to employees and Montana vendors. TOURISM AND RECREATION Tourism and recreation continue to be a major driver in Bozeman and Montana. The Bozeman area benefits from its proximity to some of the State’s most beautiful natural amenities, such as hiking trails and rivers and streams that are often used for fishing and rafting, as well as its proximity to Yellowstone National Park and two popular ski areas: Bridger Bowl and Big Sky. During the summer months, Yellowstone National Park is the top destination for nonresident visitors in Montana, many of whom pass through or spend time in Bozeman. Since 2000, park visitation has increased at approximately 2.6% per year or roughly by 89,000 visitors per year. Walking around Downtown Bozeman one often hears foreign, mostly European, languages being spoken indicating the global draw of the region. HEALTHCARE The Health Care sector is one of the largest employers in Bozeman and Gallatin County and is a significant contributor to the regional economy. Bozeman Health, which is composed of two hospitals (one in Bozeman), several treatment centers and urgent care centers, and retirement and assisted living facilities, is one of the primary drivers of the regional health care sector. In addition, there are many smaller local technology firms that are part of the healthcare field and contribute to economic growth in the region. TECHNOLOGY Bozeman continues to be a hub for technological companies that are both started in or moved into Montana. The city includes a diverse set of technology companies that range from software and hardware companies to optics and photonics firms. The presence of larger and more established firms, such as Oracle, and the influence of Montana State University creates a business environment that is strongly entrepreneurial. REGIONAL TRADE CENTER Bozeman is a regional trade and service center in Southwest Montana. Bozeman’s retail, services, and healthcare businesses serve a trade area of approximately 150 miles or more. Serving this large of a trade area has increased the amount of retail that Bozeman can support. The influx of visitors has helped the community diversify the retail and food and beverage mix and strengthen downtown through the additional injection of spending in addition to the local and regional population. 222 223 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 D-1 PROJECTIONS REPORT This Appendix includes projected trends for the community for the life of the Growth Policy. The following information can be primarily found in the 2018 Demographic and Real Estate Market Assessment developed by Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. (EPS). POPULATION PROJECTIONS If current trends continue, even at a more moderate pace, Gallatin County will grow by nearly 55,000 people from 2017 through 2045 with about half of the growth likely to occur in the City of Bozeman. Job growth will drive most of the population growth, and 42,000 new jobs are projected over this time period. Projected job growth is 1,500 jobs per year over the roughly 25-year projection tapering from 1,700 jobs per year in the near term down to 1,300 per year in the outer years of the projection. To support the projected job growth in all of Gallatin County, a population increase of nearly 55,000 is D 224 D-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES required or almost 2,000 people per year at an annual rate of 1.52 percent. This is a lower rate than has been experienced in the recent past. From 2000 through 2016, Gallatin County added an average of 2,200 people each year. This period included a severe national recession which limited job creation. If job creation is higher than projected then population will likewise increase. As a municipality, Bozeman has the tools to provide water and sewer service at the City scale. Smaller districts in the unincorporated County do not have the same financial resources to provide these services which will limit the amount of growth that occurs in unincorporated areas. HOUSING AND COMMERCIAL BUILDING SPACE PROJECTIONS Bozeman has consistently accounted for about half of the population and housing growth in Gallatin County, and the projections in this report assume that this trend continues. Bozeman is also expected to continue to account for a large share of the retail, office, major employer, and hospitality markets going forward. With Bozeman capturing approximately half of the countywide housing demand, this projection estimates demand for 12,700 new homes in Bozeman over the 2017 through 2045 time period. On an annual basis, construction is projected at approximately 450 homes per year on average compared to 600 homes per year over the past 10 years. Actual residential construction in the period since the projection exceeded even the 600 home per year rate. An affordable housing needs assessment prepared in 2018 found a deficiency of 728 dwellings to meet existing demand and support a healthy housing market. The 2010 US Census found that one-third of housing in Bozeman was occupied by an individual resident. Most homes are capable of servicing more than an individual person. Personal choices in housing occupancy affect the type and number of homes necessary in the future. Nonresidential construction demand in Bozeman is projected to be 6.3 million square feet from 2017 through 2045. For office development, Bozeman is projected to maintain its current market share of 80 percent of the Gallatin County office market totaling 1.7 million square feet from during this time. The estimated share of the industrial and warehousing market is lower, at 10 percent based on the higher land costs in the city and the growth in industrial space in Four Corners, Belgrade, and Manhattan. Industrial demand in Bozeman is estimated at nearly 500,000 square feet for the planning projection period. In the retail, restaurant, and hotel markets, Bozeman is expected to continue to be a major regional trade and services hub for Southwest Montana, and capture 70 percent of the retail market countywide with 1.4 million square feet of retail demand projected. Likewise, for government, education, and health care, Bozeman is projected to capture 75 percent of the demand in these sectors. 225 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 D-3 LAND DEMAND PROJECTIONS Projected land demand for the 2017 to 2045 time period ranges from 3,820 to 5,716 acres, with housing demand being the primary driver of land demand. Residential development formats will have the most influence on the form of the city and the amount of land needed to meet market demand. Not including the existing deficiency in homes, the baseline projection of land demand projects residential land demand at 3,100 acres on current estimated development densities (units per acre) ranging from 3.0 units per acre (gross density including right of way and public spaces) for single household detached units to 20 units per acre on average for multifamily development. Three units per acre for single household detached homes is an average net lot size of 7,100 square feet (0.16 ac.). A more compact development scenario was also prepared with higher residential densities; single household detached homes are assumed to be 5.0 units per acre gross density which translates to an average lot size of 4,300 square feet. The compact scenario projects residential land demand at 1,800 acres. In all cases, a 50 percent planning adjustment is added to allow for healthy market competition and land use planning flexibility. Residential land demand comprises 70 to 80 percent of total land demand in the higher density and lower density scenarios, respectively. Over the projection period, non-residential land demand is estimated at approximately 500 acres, or 18 acres per year. Commercial development densities were held constant as they will be dependent on market preferences for surface parking-which is costly to develop. On average, commercial rents and values do not make structured parking financially feasible in Bozeman. Some high value areas such as Downtown and around major employers could support structured parking that will allow for higher commercial development densities. Additional access using good bicycle and pedestrian facilities can also reduce parking demand. The 0.30 FAR assumption for office space is still higher than typical suburban densities and reflects the influence of high land costs in Bozeman. After adjusting for planning flexibility and market competition, the baseline scenario totals to 3,900 acres of land and the higher density scenario totals to 2,600 acres. In both cases, residential land demand comprises 70 to 80 percent of the total land demand, highlighting the importance of housing on the physical form of a community. Very roughly, these acreages translate to about 4 to 6 sections of land area (4 to 6 square miles) assuming that all development was on undeveloped land. There are however opportunities in Bozeman to fill in existing undeveloped enclaves (land surrounded or nearly surrounded by incorporated Bozeman that has not been annexed), or to redevelop areas not constructed to their full potential such as along N. 7th Avenue. Infill and redevelopment will reduce the amount of new land that is consumed by growth. In particular, The Midtown (North 7th corridor) has several large properties that can support a large amount of additional housing and employment. Infill and redevelopment in that type of setting has the most potential to affect net land demand. In other cases where, for example, one housing unit is replaced by only one or two units, there is much less of an impact on net land consumption. The amount of land available for infill development can be estimated, but it is uncertain as to how much land will actually be redeveloped as it varies widely according to the economic conditions (e.g. existing profitable businesses) of each individual property and the desires of individual property owners. The 2018 annual land use inventory prepared by the City found that approximately 6% of the City is vacant property. Vacant property is land ready for development but currently has no structures. Approximately 11.7% of the City area is undeveloped meaning it has been annexed but is not subdivided and is not ready for construction of structures. Infill tends to be more intensive 226 in use than development on the edge of the City. However, there is much less area available for it. It is estimated that 10-15% of new construction in the next 20 years may be located within infill areas. LOCAL SERVICES PROJECTIONS The demand for local services is analyzed in the various facility plans such as fire, transportation, water, and sewer. The future service demand and other information in those plans, as may be updated from time to time, is available and meets any state law requirements for such information. NATURAL RESOURCES PROJECTIONS The natural setting of Bozeman is one of its greatest assets. Many people enjoy the outdoors as reflected in Theme 3 of the Plan. As an example, it is estimated that up to 50,000 people per month visit Hyalite Canyon south of town during the summer. In town trails see heavy use year round as well. Use of natural resources is expected to increase as the population increases. Demand for water is described in the various water plans prepared by the City. The City strives to minimize demand for natural resources by efficient operations of its utilities and other functions. Per person water use in Bozeman has decreased over time due to higher efficiency standards and active maintenance. The City is crossed by many watercourses and wetlands are also present. The City has adopted regulations to limit impact on both. No changes in numbers of water courses are expected. Wetlands may be modified as allowed by federal wetland standards. The City strives to have any wetland mitigation resulting from wetland modification located within the Gallatin Valley. There are no known forestry, commercial mining, or mineral resources known within the planning area. Therefore, there are no expected changes to these natural resources. 227 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 E-1 E 76-1-601(4) (C) INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN Section 76-1-601(4)(c), MC authorizes a growth policy to include an infrastructure plan to consider how and where infrastructure may be provided, coordinate with adjacent communities, and consider impacts and mitigation of impacts of infrastructure extension. The following table outlines the required information and where the required information in provided. 228 E-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES (4) A growth policy may : Where Data is Provided (c) establish an infrastructure plan that, at a minimum, includes: (i) projections, in maps and text, of the jurisdiction’s growth in population and number of residential, commercial, and industrial units over the next 20 years; Appendix D – Projections report (ii) for a city, a determination regarding if and how much of the city’s growth is likely to take place outside of the city’s existing jurisdictional area over the next 20 years and a plan of how the city will coordinate infrastructure planning with the county or counties where growth is likely to take place; Chapter 3, Appendices B and D (iii) for a county, a plan of how the county will coordinate infrastructure planning with each of the cities that project growth outside of city boundaries and into the county’s jurisdictional area over the next 20 years; Not applicable to the City (iv) for cities, a land use map showing where projected growth will be guided and at what densities within city boundaries; Ch 3 – Future Land Use (v) for cities and counties, a land use map that designates infrastructure planning areas adjacent to cities showing where projected growth will be guided and at what densities; Ch 3 – Future Land Use, Appendix B - (vi) using maps and text, a description of existing and future public facilities necessary to efficiently serve projected development and densities within infrastructure planning areas, including, whenever feasible, extending interconnected municipal street networks, sidewalks, trail systems, public transit facilities, and other municipal public facilities throughout the infrastructure planning area. For the purposes of this subsection (4)(c)(vi), public facilities include but are not limited to drinking water treatment and distribution facilities, sewer systems, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste disposal facilities, parks and open space, schools, public access areas, roads, highways, bridges, and facilities for fire protection, law enforcement, and emergency services; Appendices B and C addresses the majority of these subjects. The City does not control placement of public schools. The City does work with School District 7 on annexation and site design of properties to provide school services. The City’s facility plans address density of development in determining future pipe and road sizing. The municipal standards are expected to be adequate to service any future school building. School District 7’s service area is much larger than the City of Bozeman. 229 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 E-3 (vii) a description of proposed land use management techniques and incentives that will be adopted to promote development within cities and in an infrastructure planning area, including land use management techniques and incentives that address issues of housing affordability; Appendix B – infrastructure report, cross references to main document. The City requires annexation prior to extension of services. This ensures that new development is under a cohesive and comprehensive development review program. These include both subdivision and zoning based development review addressing all identified purposes in 76-1-102, 76-2-301 and 304, and 76-3-101, MCA. The City’s development standards support affordable housing and urban scale development by facilitating intensity of land use and efficiency of infrastructure. The City provides financial support in various ways for affordable housing. (viii) a description of how and where projected development inside municipal boundaries for cities and inside designated joint infrastructure planning areas for cities and counties could adversely impact: (A) threatened or endangered wildlife and critical wildlife habitat and corridors; There are no known threatened or endangered wildlife or habitat that are uniquely located within the planning area. Various species migrate through or seasonally inhabit the planning area. Application materials for subdivision or zoning development requires identification of wildlife habitat in the area to be developed. Effects and necessary mitigation can then be identified and required during the review. The City has adopted standards to protect watercourse corridors and wetlands. (B) water available to agricultural water users and facilities; Transitions from agricultural to other uses may affect agricultural water user facilities. The City has adopted standards applicable both with subdivision and zoning authorized changes in land use to protect water user facilities. The standards require coordination and contact with water facility owners and protection of facilities. Water sources primarily arise outside of the planning area. (C) the ability of public facilities, including schools, to safely and efficiently service current residents and future growth; The City’s facility plans, summarized in Appendix B, demonstrate the City’s plans and ability to serve current users and future growth. School District 7 has their own facility plans and they indicate they are capable of providing services as growth continues. (D) a local government’s ability to provide adequate local services, including but not limited to emergency, fire, and police protection; The City’s facility plans, summarized in Appendix B, demonstrate the City’s plans and ability to serve current users and future growth. City voters approved a bond in 2019 to build a new public safety center which will provide municipal courts, police, and fire facilities. 230 (E) the safety of people and property due to threats to public health and safety, including but not limited to wildfire, flooding, erosion, water pollution, hazardous wildlife interactions, and traffic hazards; The City’s adopted development standards require development to stay out of designated floodplains, control stormwater runoff and erosion, and provide for a multifunction transportation system that protects safety of the traveler. The City’s development standards require multiple access points, adequate water flow for fire fighting, and separation of buildings to lessen potential impacts from fire and wildfire. The City applies the state adopted building codes which address fire resistance and suppression. The City’s water and sewer services are subject to intensive monitoring to ensure that citizens are not exposed to water pollution. (F) natural resources, including but not limited to forest lands, mineral resources, sand and gravel resources, streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands, and ground water; and The City has setback and other standards adopted to protect streams, wetlands, and rivers from pollution, encroachment, and streambank disruption. There are no commercially viable forest lands within the planning area. There are no known mineral resources other than possible gravel within the planning area. There are no functioning gravel mining operations that would be negatively affected by the planned growth depicted in chapter 3. G) agricultural lands and agricultural production; and Bozeman is located in an area with good soils for agriculture. Agricultural industries are disrupted when land coverts to either suburban or urban purposes. Substantial portions of the planning area outside of the City limits have been converted from functional agricultural operations to hobby or non-agriculture uses. Loss of small scale farms is a national trend. (ix) a description of measures, including land use management techniques and incentives, that will be adopted to avoid, significantly reduce, or mitigate the adverse impacts identified under subsection (4)(c)(viii). The City has robust standards for land development. Intensive development is allowed with provision for adequate services to new users. The municipal codes, design standards, and topic plans as described in Appendix B, ensure that mitigation of negative impacts is provided or impacts are avoided all together. Development at true urban intensities is less land consumptive than suburban or rural residential uses and therefore displaces less agriculture. Detailed standards are in Chapters 2, 16, 18, 26, 32, 34, 38, 40, and 42. 231 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 F-1 F GLOSSARY These terms are defined to help the reader understand what the terms mean when used in this plan. If terms are not defined here they may be defined in an adopted topic plan. If not, they have standard dictionary meanings. Bozeman Planning Area. See Figure 3-1. Compatible Development. The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of this plan. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to: variety of architectural design; rhythm; scale; intensity; materials; building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area, motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design. 232 F-2 CITY OF BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, APPENDICES Commercial Center. A mix of commercial land uses typically serving more than one residential neighborhood, usually a subarea of the city with services and retail goods. This term also includes small commercial areas providing limited retail goods and services, such as grocery stores and dry cleaners for nearby residential customers. Compatible Land Use. A land use which may by virtue of the characteristics of its discernible outward effects, exist in harmony with an adjoining land use of differing character. Effects often measured to determine compatibility include, but are not limited to, noise, odor, light, and the presence of physical hazards such as combustible or explosive materials. Complete Street. Complete streets are streets designed and operated to enable safe use and support mobility for all users. Those include people of all ages and abilities, regardless of whether they are traveling as drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, or public transportation riders. Connectivity. The degree to which roads and paths are connected and allow for direct travel between destinations. Density. For residential areas, the number of homes per net acre of land. For non-residential areas, by floor area ratio: the number of square feet of building area per net acre of land. Downtown. The area subject to the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan bound by the B-3 zoning district which generally extends to Broadway Avenue, Lamme Street, 5th Avenue, and Olive Street. Downtown is mixed-use district but primarily commercial in function and character, Downtown, and particularly Main Street, is distinguished by its historic architecture but also includes notable recent development especially in the areas outside of the historic core. Goal. A statement of general purpose or intent relating to a defined topic. A goal generally seeks an improvement in the status of a subject under the heading of a theme. Growth. An increase in Bozeman’s population and/or area. The increase may be the result of natural population growth through births exceeding deaths, in-migration, or annexation. Growth rate. A measure over time of the increase or decrease in City population compared to the City’s population at a specified date. Growth rates are usually expressed as a percentage and applied to time increments of one, five, or ten years. Health. A state of physical, mental, and social well-being, and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity. Health is a resource for everyday life, not the objective of living. Health is a positive concept emphasizing social and personal resources, as well as physical capacities. Human Scale. The proportional relationship of a particular building, structure, or streetscape element to the human form and function. Human scale does not prohibit multistory structures. Infill. The development or redevelopment of vacant, abandoned, or under-utilized properties within or wholly surrounded by the City, and where water, sewer, streets, and fire protection have already been developed and are provided. Infill is located within land subdivided for at least 35 years. Missing Middle Housing. Missing middle housing is housing constructed in buildings which are of a size and design compatible in scale and form with detached individual homes. Example housing types include duplex, triplex, live-work, cottage housing, group living, row houses, townhouses, horizontally layered apartments, flats, and other similar configurations. Mitigate/Mitigation. Measures required or taken to avoid, minimize, compensate for, or offset definable negative impacts of development on the environment, public facilities and services, or other issues of community concern defined by ordinance. Neighborhood. A walkable area of Bozeman with a distinct character that may have some boundaries defined by physical barriers, such as major roads or railroads or by natural features, such as watercourses or topography. A neighborhood includes both geographic (place-oriented) and social (people-oriented) components and is often characterized by residents sharing common amenities such as an elementary school, park, shops, community center or other similar elements. As a distinct and identified area, often with its own name, neighborhoods are recognized as fostering community spirit and a sense of place, factors recognized as important in community planning. Net acres. The area of land measured in acres, minus any dedications to the public, such as public or private streets and parks. Objective. A more specific statement than a goal which seeks to advance the intent of a goal. Objectives bridge the distance between goals which are general in nature 233 CITY COMMISSION DRAFT, 20 OCTOBER 2020 F-3 and policies which call for a specified and distinct action to be accomplished. An example is: “Support and encourage creative site development design.” Open Space. Land and water areas retained for use as active or passive recreation areas, agriculture, or resource protection in an essentially undeveloped state. Pedestrian Oriented. Development designed with an emphasis on pedestrian safety, convenience and accessibility that is equal to or greater than the emphasis given to automotive access and convenience. Policy. A definite course or method of action selected from among alternatives and in light of given conditions to guide and determine present and future decisions. Sprawl. A pattern of development generally characterized by a combination of: • Low population density, • Forced reliance on individual automotive transportation, • Distribution of land uses which require driving in order to satisfy basic needs, and,• Development which leaves large undeveloped areas surrounded by development. Special Topic Plan. A formal plan prepared for a specific physical resource or function or area of the City which examines the current state, future needs, and recommended means of meeting identified future needs. Examples of topic plans are the Wastewater Facility Plan, Affordable Housing Action Plan, various Neighborhood Plans, and the Transportation Plan. Walkable. A walkable area has:• A center, whether it’s a main street or a public space.• People: Enough people for businesses to flourish and for public transit to run frequently.• Parks and public space: Functional and pleasant public places to gather and play.• Pedestrian design: Buildings are close to the street, parking lots are relegated to the back. • Schools and workplaces: Close enough that walking to and from home to these destinations is realistic. • Complete streets: Streets designed for bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit. 234 235 160 acres 40 acres 10 acres INT E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE FR O N T A G E R D GOOCH HILL RD DURSTON RD S 3RD AVE COTTONWOOD RD HUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W E VALLEY CENTER RD SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE W MAIN ST W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST N 7TH AVE S P R I NGHI L L RDDAVIS LN HARPER PUCKETT RD B R I D GER CANYON RD N1 9 T H A VEW COLLEGE ST E MAIN ST W KAGY BLVD N ROUSE AVE BRIDGER DR HIGHLANDBLVDSWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD W PEACH ST S FERGUSON AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN S 11TH AVE FRONTAG E R D S 3RD AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN Future Land Use Map The boudaries depicted on this map are subject to change through individual amendments and growth policy updates as described in Chapter 5 of this growth policy. 0 1 2½Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´Growth Policy Boundary City Limits Parks and Open Lands Urban Neighborhood Traditional Core Residential Mixed Use Regional Commercial and Services Community Commercial Mixed Use Industrial Public Institutions No City Services 236 Revised November 2, 2020 The following is a consolidated list of all edits to the text of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 directed by the City Commission. They are organized by page sequence. Page numbering first listed is the Planning Board draft page number, second listed in brackets is the page number in the revised document. Title page – Revised title to: Bozeman MT Community Plan 2020, City Commission revisions draft October 20, 2020 Page I – Revised the signature page to reflect the current positions on the City Commission. Changed Jennifer Madgic to the Commission Member on the Planning Board. The Resolution number is 5133, date will be blank still. Page II [II] – Revised Acknowledgments. City Commission to include Chris Mehl as past member, add Jennifer Madgic, change names for Mayor and Deputy Mayor. Jennifer Madgic as Commission Member on Planning Board, Chris Mehl as past Commission Member on Planning Board. Added Sarah Rosenburg and “City of Bozeman GIS Division” to City Staff list Page 5 [6] – Updated City limits area number to 20.9 sq. miles. Page 5 [7] – Updated Planning Area map to reflect recent changes in City area. Page 6 [8-15] – Inserted new section on approach to growth after Planning Time Horizon paragraph, including various illustrative graphics. TO GROW OR NOT TO GROW? IF SO, HOW? Bozeman has seen nearly continuous growth since its founding. The population of the City has expanded by 275% over the past 50 years. - 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 1870188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990199520002005201020152020Bozeman Population 237 Many factors, including but not limited to: nearby extensive outdoor recreation opportunities, Montana State University, people who left the area for careers returning, changing technology enabling remote work, and people becoming familiar with the area during visits to Yellowstone National Park influence the decisions of individuals and businesses to move to Bozeman and the Gallatin Valley. Developing factors that appear to be increasing interest in the local area include climate change, increasing economic opportunities in the local area with technology and other sector growth, and recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. The increasing number of people and associated impacts cause changes in the community. Those changes stimulate an examination of whether the City should continue to grow or if it should try to “put on the brakes” by attempting to constrain growth in some manner. Such a question reflects the deep concerns of people in many areas and issues. Diverse changes have caused increases in number of homes and expanding areas of development. As household sizes have decreased over time additional houses are required to serve the same population. The number of homes in Bozeman required to house the same 10,000 people increased 47.8% between 1970 and 2010. That increased number of homes requires more streets, water and sewer pipes, and similar expanded municipal and private facilities. The cost of services per person correspondingly increases. Should this household size trend reverse, the City could see large population increases without construction of additional homes. Such shifts in demographics are difficult to predict. Bozeman has expanded in population and land area from in-migration, change in the demographic makeup of the community, new births, and annexation of new areas to serve new or existing residents. Community change is dynamic and affected by many forces. It is also inevitable. Even if population stayed the same, there are forces that make outward and inward changes in a community. Context of the growth question Consideration of Bozeman’s growth cannot be separated from the larger context of the Gallatin Valley. Bozeman has been 45-50% of the county population over time. When people discuss growth in Bozeman they are often thinking of more than just the legal boundaries of the City. Rapid growth has also been happening in other valley municipalities and the unincorporated areas of the County. The Planning Area for the BCP is approximately 70 square miles. Most of that area lies outside of the existing municipal limits. However, it is not free from development pressure or change. As shown on the map on this page, much of the land within the Planning Area and outside of the City has already been subdivided and developed to some degree, mostly as suburban and rural housing. 238 239 Only 8% of all the parcels in the nearly 49 square miles outside of the City limits are larger than 20 acres. Twenty acres is the minimum area generally considered eligible to be classified as agricultural property. This parcel pattern reflects many decades of land use decisions by private property owners as well as various governmental agencies. The Planning Area outside of the City’s legal limits remains under the final authority of Gallatin County. The County and City do not have a shared planning board or regulations at this time. As described in Chapter 2, Theme 7 the City works with Gallatin County on land use planning issues. However, should a land owner outside of the City ask to change zoning or subdivide land the County Commission has the final decision. The City’s regulations only apply within its legal limits. Areas that people often describe as being in Bozeman such as the Woodland Park and Middle Creek developments along Huffine Lane are outside of the City limits and were approved by the County. Does the City have to grow? The City is not required to grow in area or population. The undeveloped areas in town would eventually fill in with development. The City could choose to not annex new property. The City could stop acquiring water rights, stop expanding treatment capacity for water or sewer, or could strictly limit development opportunities through regulations on development intensity or rate. All of these would result in fewer homes and businesses than would otherwise be present. There is additional capacity presently in the City’s systems due to planned “working room” to account for the fact that expansion of capacity often comes in large increments and therefore some excess capacity is needed at any given time to meet needs while the next increment of expansion is designed and constructed. Such capacity could be used up and not replaced. A key sub-question and consequence in this subject is whether lack of capacity in municipal land area or systems would cause people to stop seeking to come to the Gallatin Valley. The residents of the City of Bozeman have for many decades been between 40-50% of the total county population. Since half or more of the county population has chosen to locate outside of the Bozeman limits it is highly likely that growth would continue but would locate outside the City within the unincorporated areas or other municipalities. The factors that draw people to the area would be unlikely to be changed by a City decision to restrict development. Therefore, the character of the valley, including areas adjacent to Bozeman, would continue to change but without material influence from the City. Certain US cities and towns have attempted to artificially constrain growth by limiting annual growth percentages, limiting building permits, establishing greenbelt buffers, building height restrictions, etc. Generally speaking, such artificial growth limits tend to redistribute future growth outside city boundaries, drive up housing prices and rental costs, increase commuting times, and limit employment opportunities within city boundaries. 240 As the population and development of the Gallatin Valley has occurred the degree of interdependence has increased. The Bozeman economy relies substantially on persons living outside of the city to work at jobs located in the city. Census Data from 2017, the most recent available, shows a total of 33,879 jobs in the City. Of that number 13,667 were serviced by City residents. The number of City residents leaving the City for employment was 9,874 and the number of non-City residents coming into the City for work was 20,212. A key outcome of this situation is that tens of thousands of people are commuting every day into the City and consuming street capacity, police and fire services, and other municipal services. However, revenue generated by their homes does not come to the City to offset those demands for service. On a national level, the supply of housing is not keeping up with demand for housing. On a local level, this issue was examined by the 2019 Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) for the City. A similar effort is being conducted at this time by Gallatin County for areas outside of the City. The HNA identified a deficiency of available housing as a strong contributor to housing price escalation in the area. Housing prices, both nationally and locally, have increased substantially faster than incomes. Housing scarcity is a substantial concern and impacts the ability of businesses to hire workers. As local unemployment has been low for many years, attraction of new employees is dependent on the availability of additional housing in the area. As discussed above, the majority of the Planning Area is outside of the City limits. The City of Bozeman and Gallatin County have worked together to encourage annexation and development within the City limits. Development within the City is more land efficient than rural or suburban development in unannexed areas. Urban intensity development whether more intensive apartment style development or more typical medium density residential is much more land efficient than rural/suburban development. Comparing suburban development with an average density of one home per 1.25 acres and rural at one home per 5.5 acres to the more intensive apartment style development of a recent project downtown; the suburban development consumes 135 times the amount of land and the rural consumes 594 times the amount of land per home. Development within the City also provides for a wide range of housing types to meet a wide range of housing needs. Development within the City lessens likelihood of conversion of agricultural and open spaces to other uses but does convert uses on some land with annexation. Municipal development enables use of highly effective centralized water and sewer systems. Such centralized systems are more protective of water quality both at the surface and underground. Areas such as the Helena Valley in Lewis and Clark County are experiencing problems with ground water contamination resulting from significant use of on-site water and sewer systems. Gallatin County has been a good partner in encouraging potential development to annex and develop within the City. The current and proposed County growth policies and the Triangle 241 Community Plan support such action. However, if the City is unable or unwilling to annex and provide services the County will not prohibit development on that parcel. As shown on the context map, there has been considerable rural and suburban development within the Planning Area. If we grow, how? In many planning efforts and discussions over the decades, the Planning Board and City Commission have considered the various elements of the question of to grow or not grow and the consequences of either approach. After considering this question, they have concluded that having growth within the physical boundaries of Bozeman results in better outcomes than not. Therefore, the BCP approaches growth as something that overall is positive but recognizes that it does not come without drawbacks and that the community will change over time. The City has adopted land development regulations and policies to reasonably mitigate negative impacts. These have been adopted to address the question of “If so, how.” Regulations can do many things to ensure adequate physical facilities and a visually appealing and functional development of sites. They support expansion of employment and tax base for the community. They ensure provision of new parks and walking trails, keep the water flowing if there is a home fire to be put out, and provide a framework within which people may pursue dreams of their own homes and businesses. For all they can accomplish, there are some things they cannot do. They cannot make there be fewer people on a favorite walking trail, make certain you see people you know as you walk down the street, or control things that happen outside of the City limits. They don’t set school service boundaries; or change the floodplain or water quality or wetland standards established by federal and state agencies. They can’t assure that buying a house will work out well for you. They can’t change the flight path of aircraft headed to the Bozeman Yellowstone International Airport. They cannot assure you of a neighbor you want to have. They don’t change any state or federal policy. They do not prevent change or guarantee that change will happen in the way any particular person prefers. Mitigating impacts For new people and businesses to come and establish in the community the City must be able to provide land area, utility services, and other functions. It is the long standing policy of the City to balance the interests of new and existing residents. Therefore, the City has established standards and procedures to strive to ensure that new development proportionately contributes to the services and facilities needed to support new development. The following examples identify significant policies but it is not an exhaustive list. • Annexation: Annexation is almost entirely initiated by the landowner. The City has limited ability to start an annexation process. Annexation is often motivated by a desire to develop property or to address a failed on-site septic system. At the time of annexation, land owners commit to provide or do provide easements for major 242 roadways, and to follow the City’s land development standards requiring the landowner to provide needed infrastructure for development of the land. • Water Rights: All water in the state not reserved to the Federal Government or Tribal Government is controlled by the State of Montana. No one can use water without the State’s permission. Such permission is called a water right. When new development occurs, the City requires that new development to provide either water rights to the City or to pay an equal amount of money so the City can acquire water rights adequate to serve the new development. Existing water users are not required to pay for water rights for new development. • Impact Fees: Impact fees are costs charged to new development to construct fire, water, sewer, and transportation facilities to support new development. There are strict rules to ensure that the impact fees don’t fix existing problems. Impact fees enable the City to more closely keep up with water and sewer treatment capacity and other infrastructure needed for new development to be functional and safe. • Utility planning: The City conducts long range planning for water, sewer, transportation, parks, and other services. This planning work examines the needs for existing users and future users. This enables the City to construct facilities before big bottlenecks occur. Since a water line can have a service life of at least 70 years, sizing them correctly is a significant concern to avoid future service limits and failures. Knowing what services are needed enables the City to work effectively and cost efficiently to serve existing and future users. Recent expansion and upgrades at the City’s water and sewer treatment facilities were required both for maintaining legal compliance with treatment standards for existing users and to enable new users. • Regulations: The City adopts standards for development to correlate timing of new development with the services needed to serve it. This protects the public health and safety. The regulations also provide predictability in decision making to both existing and new members of the community. Predictability is a very important element in the complex and difficult public and private decisions relating to growth. Page 8 [18] – Updated table – the following table is the updated information, added persons in poverty column City Median Household Income (ACS, 2018) Median Housing Price (Zillow, 2019) Median House Price to Median Income Ratio Population (ACS, 2019) City Area (Sq. Miles) Pop. / Sq. Mile Growth % 2010 - 2019 (ACS, 2019) Annualized Growth Rate (2010 - 2019) Persons in Poverty, % (ACS 2019) Bend, OR $63,468 $443,400 7.0 100,421 33.3 3,016 31% 3.1% 10.3% Billings, MT $57,172 $243,700 4.3 109,577 43.5 2,519 5.1% 0.5% 10.2% Boulder, CO $66,117 $793,578 12.0 107,673 25.7 4,190 8.3% 0.8% 21.3% Bozeman, MT $51,896 $440,200 8.5 49,831 20.9 2,384 33.7% 3.3% 18.6% Fort Collins, CO $62,132 $393,500 6.3 170,243 47.1 3,615 17.5% 1.8% 16.8% 243 Meridian, ID $68,131 $326,400 4.8 114,161 26.8 4,260 48.3% 4.8% 8.8% Missoula, MT $45,010 $308,800 6.9 75,516 29.0 2,604 12.1% 1.2% 18.3% Sources: (ACS, 2018 and 2019) U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 5-Year, (Zillow 2019) Zillow.com, Accessed December 1, 2019. City Area: Wikipedia Page 9 [19] – Revised the list of plans to replace the reference to the Gallatin Triangle Planning Study with the recently completed Triangle Community Plan (https://gallatincomt.virtualtownhall.net/sites/g/files/vyhlif606/f/uploads/triangle_community_plan_final.pdf). Reflected this change throughout the document Page 9 [19] – Revised the list of plans to update the title for the “housing action plan” and the date most recently amended by the City Commission to “Community Housing Action Plan – 2020.” (https://www.bozeman.net/home/showdocument?id=10195) Page 12 [21] – Revised information on housing affordability to include more recent data provided by Community Housing Manager. 1st paragraph last two lines, “The median sale price of homes, including single-households, townhomes and condominiums, has increased 90% since 2012. This is an average increase of over 11% per year.” Pages 15-40 [23-49] – Placed a color stipe down the outside edge of page keyed to each theme as a visual cue for subject matter. Page 18 [27] – Revised title of Theme to be “A City of Unique Neighborhoods “ Page 20 [29] – Revised N-1.7 Review, and where appropriate, revise block and lot design standards – including orientation for solar power generation – throughout city neighborhoods. Page 20 [29] – Added new N-1.12 Encourage major employers to provide employee housing within walking / biking distance of place of employment. Page 21 [30] – Revised N-3.5: Strongly discourage private covenants that restrict housing diversity or are contrary to city land development policies or climate action plan goals. Page 21 [30] – Added new N-3.9 Ensure an adequate supply of appropriately designated land to accommodate Low Income Housing Tax Credit development in qualifying census tracts. Page 21 [30] – Revised N-4.1 Continue to recognize and honor the unique history, neighborhoods, neighborhood character, and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs and policy led by both City and community efforts. Page 21 [30] – Revised N-4.3 Revise Design Guidelines within the Conservation Overlay District to distinguish Downtown from the residential neighborhoods, to encourage historic neighborhoods and neighborhoods near transition areas, both north and south of downtown are preserved. 244 Page 21 [30] – Added new N-4.4 Ensure an adequate supply of off-leash facilities to meet the future demand of Bozeman dog owners. Page 24 [33] – Revised DCD 1.5: Identify underutilized, vacant, and undeveloped sites for possible development or redevelopment, including evaluating possible development incentives. Page 25 [34] – Added Integrated Water Resources Plan to list of “Other Relevant Plans” in the side bar. Integrated Water Resources Plan– September 2013: https://www.bozeman.net/home/showdocument?id=836 Page 25 [34] – Revised DCD 3.5: Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers. Page 28 [37] – Revised EPO-1.5-Work with partner organizations to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk, environmentally sensitive areas that contribute to water quality, wildlife corridors, or wildlife habitat (specifically wildlife habitat as we continue outward growth). Page 32 [41] – Added new M-1.14 Identify possible routes for future bicycle and pedestrian beltway / greenway. Page 38 [47] - Revised Regional Partners map to include the Triangle Community Plan boundary. Changed symbols so the Bozeman planning area overlays Belgrade’s with the Bozeman shading. Page 43, [52] Revised 2nd paragraph of the FLUM description as follows: The future land use map is not limited to conditions or needs expected within a certain number of years. It depicts what, at whatever time the land changes use, what the City sees as the best long term use. It may take many plan update cycles before the depicted conditions on the future land use map occur. The Planning Area boundary and development opportunities are coordinated with the City’s water and sewer plans. These plans are periodically updated. The Planning Area boundary and capacity should be reviewed to accommodate changes in these plans. Due to limitations of scale and ability to predict the nuances of land development, the water bodies and streams are not depicted nor are the locations of future parks. Page 47 [52] – Added a new Future Land Use Map category Maker Space Mixed Use. Placed prior to Industrial in list. Renumbered all following land uses. “This classification provides areas for dynamic mixed uses including technology industries, manufacturing, research and development, offices, and supportive uses to provide employment and services to the community. Opportunity for live/work may be provided or housing elements integrated on upper floors of mixed use buildings. Careful consideration is given to public policies supporting compatibility to enable mixed uses to coexist in harmony. Development within these areas is often intensive and the area is connected to significant transportation corridors. Although use in these areas may be intense, they are part of the larger community and standards for architecture and site design apply.” Page 48 [56] – Replaced Table 4 with new layout, include hyperlinks to all zoning districts. Include 245 new icons and color for Maker Space Mixed Use, implementing zoning districts are BP, M-1, NEHMU, and PLI. Page 49 [60] – Replaced future land use map reflecting updates directed by City Commission. Replaced small planning/city boundary map with updated and larger version to improve readability. Page 49 [60] – Added map notation that boundaries are subject to change through the amendment process. Page 52 [63] – Revised short term action list 2 to include objective N-3.9 Page 52 [63] – Revised short term action list to add #14 Work with partner organizations to implement EPO-1.5 to identify and reduce impacts on environmentally sensitive areas. Page 53 [64]– Reduced the listed indicators to the following list only as directed by the City Commission, references are to Planning Board draft numbering. Updated additional row information for reporting frequency and descriptive notes. Remove column for current status as none of the selected criteria need that column. Qualitative City Measures 1 Community Perception of City Performance City of Neighborhoods 3 Housing Stock Diversity 6 Residential Density 7 Walk Score Complementary Districts 9 Location of Development Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Lands 13 Park Accessibility 14 Vehicle Miles Traveled Mobility Choices 17 Transit Accessibility Creative, Innovative, and Entrepreneurial Economy 19 Land Use Availability Regional Coordination 22 City Expansion Appendix A Page A-9 to A-10 – Updated section to reflect public engagement during the adoption process. PUBLIC HEARINGS SUMMARY Notification The City conducted multiple public hearings to share and receive information from the community prior to making a decision on whether or not to adopt the draft Community Plan. The public hearings were publicized through television; through newspaper articles and paid advertisements; posting dates on the project website; at updates to the City Commission and Bozeman Planning Board; direct emails to those who have supplied their contact info as part 246 of this process; and social media outlets, including the City’s existing Facebook, Nextdoor, and Twitter accounts. Purpose The purpose of the public hearing is the formal opportunity for community participation in the adoption process. Public hearings are required by state law prior to any final decision by the Planning Board or the City Commission. Public input and comments were considered and many were integrated into the final Community Plan. Events After developing the document draft for public review the Planning Board held three public hearings on July 21st, July 28th, and August 10th, 2020. The Planning Board considered the draft document, heard and considered public comments, and made several revisions to the map and text. On August 17th the Planning Board formally passed Resolution 20-1 transmitting the recommended document to the City Commission. On August 18th the City Commission was formally presented the Planning Board’s recommended document and the subsequent review process was outlined. The City Commission formally passed a resolution of intent to adopt a growth policy on August 25, 2020. Adoption of the Resolution of Intent is the formal initiation of the City Commission’s review. To help encourage public understanding of the document and participation in the public review process the City hosted three online workshops to present aspects of the plan and answer questions. There were 116 attendees at the three workshops. Recordings of the workshops were posted on the project website so those not able to attend could still obtain the information. • Sept 16 - Public work session 1 focused on text of Plan with Q&A. • Sept 23 - Public work session 2 focused on future land use with Q&A. • Sept 30 - Public work session 3 focused on overall Plan and open Q&A. On October 6, 2020 the City Commission conducted their first work session and public hearing on the draft. They asked questions, heard public comments, and suggested possible revisions for consideration at their following meeting. On October 20th the City Commission held their second work session and public hearing. After considering a staff presentation and public comments the Commission directed several amendments to be included in a revised draft of the growth policy. On November 17, 2020 the City Commission conducted their final public hearing. After consideration of all matters and public comment they adopted Resolution 5133 adopting the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Appendix B Page B-11 Add the Triangle Community Plan to the plan list as follows. 247 Triangle Community Plan – August 2020: https://gallatincomt.virtualtownhall.net/sites/g/files/vyhlif606/f/uploads/triangle_community_plan_final.pdf). “The Triangle Community Plan is a joint effort between the City of Bozeman, City of Belgrade, and Gallatin County to establish shared priorities for land management. The area of the plan is generally bounded by western Bozeman, southern Belgrade, and south of the Four Corners area. The plan sets a shared vision, values, and key issues and goals and implementation steps to address those issues. The Triangle Community Plan is a formally adopted neighborhood plan under the growth policies for Gallatin County and City of Belgrade. It was not formally adopted by the City as part of the growth policy but is a recognized plan of the City.” Appendix E Page E-2 Revised table to add on top of the right hand column “Where data is provided” to direct the reader to the appropriate location of information. Changes to Future Land Use Map Changed Sacajawea Audubon property at the end of Village Downtown Boulevard to Parks and Open Lands per City Commission direction. Changed the eastern side of N. 18th north of Durston Road previously shown as Community Commercial Mixed Use to Residential Mixed Use per City Commission direction. Changed entire block bounded by Lamme Street, Beall Street, N. 3rd Avenue, and Grand Avenue to Traditional Core as directed by the Planning Board. Correct an omission of a previously directed edit. Changed 1804 N. Rouse from Industrial to Public Institutions. This property is owned by the City. Changed the SE corner of the intersection of Highland Blvd and Kagy Blvd from Public Institutions to Urban Neighborhood. School District 7 owns this property and has been consulted on the change. The property will be transferring from the School District to private hands in the next year. Change the public park on the south side of Baxter Lane midway between Davis Lane and N. 27th Avenue from Public Institutions to Parks and Open Lands. Correct an error resulting from Planning Board decisions to merge and separate land use categories. 248 Various minor revisions throughout the map to tidy boundaries by moving them to street centerlines, aggregating adjacent areas of the same designation separated by a street, and generally improving map readability. None of these changes change the assigned future land use on a property. 249 MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COMMISSION FROM: CHRIS SAUNDERS AND TOM ROGERS RE: ADDITIONAL POSSIBLE EDITS TO BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN 2020 DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 2020 Staff has identified 3 additional items for the City Commission to consider before finalizing the decision on Resolution 5133. 1) Appendix F Page F-2 The City Commission requested that the Staff investigate adding a graphic to illustrate the definition of Missing Middle Housing. Staff has reached out to the originators of the term who have requested that if we use the graphic below (which they produced and has been referred to during the growth policy update during Planning Board discussion) that the image along with the italics text be included. Staff has no objection to the request. Staff suggests Image Copyright Opticos Design, Inc. Missing Middle Housing is a concept created by Opticos Design. Missing Middle Housing is a range of house-scale buildings with multiple units— compatible in scale and form with detached single-household homes—located in a walkable neighborhood. For more information on this topic visit www.missingmiddlehousing.com or www.opticosdesign.com. A comprehensive book on this topic titled, “Missing MIddle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today’s Housing Crisis,” is available at either of these sites as well. 2) Staff has identified a request to amend the future land use map which was received but not acted on during the Planning Board plan drafting. The request is attached. Staff has no 250 objection to the request and it will not create a non-conforming situation if the zone map amendment to be heard on November 10th is granted. 3) City Commission to consider the attached possible locations for the new Make Space Mixed Use (MSMU) and determine whether or not to apply the MSMU designation to any of those areas. 251 252 Exhibit A.1 - Vicinity Map N Subject Site South 19th Ave.West Koch St. West Babcock St.South 20th Ave.West Main St. 253 Exhibit A.2 - Subject Property Vicinity Street Views 254 Exhibit B.1 - Existing Future Land Use Map - Plan Category Map Site Map N Residential Business Park Mixed Use Public Institutions 255 Exhibit B.2 - Draft Future Land Use Map Plan - Plan Category Map N Urban Neighborhood Commercial Emphasis Mixed Use Public Lands 256 Exhibit C - Requested Future Land Use Map Plan - Plan Category Map N Urban Neighborhood Extend Commercial Emphasis Mixed Use Public Lands 257 INTERSTATE 90 HWY S 19TH AVE FRONTAGE RD GOOCH HILL RD DURSTON RD S 3RD AVE COTTONWOOD RD HUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE W MAIN ST E VALLEY CENTER RD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST N 7TH AVE SPRINGHILLRDDAVIS LN B R IDGER CANYON RDHARPER PUCKETT RD N1 9 T H A VEW COLLEGE ST E MAIN ST W KAGY BLVD N ROUSE AVE BRIDGER DR HIGHLANDBLVDSWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD W PEACH ST N FERGUSON AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN S 11TH AVE FRONTAG E R D S 3RD AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN Maker Space Mixed Use Areas Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department Growth Policy Boundary City Limits Maker Space Mixed Use ´0 1 2½Miles 258 INTERSTATE 90 HWY S 19TH AVE FRONTAGE RD DURSTON RD GOOCH HILL RD S 3RD AVE COTTONWOOD RD HUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE W MAIN ST E VALLEY CENTER RD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST N 7TH AVE B R IDGER CANYON RDDAVIS LN SPRINGHILLRDHARPER PUCKETT RD N1 9 T H A VEW COLLEGE ST E MAIN ST W KAGY BLVD N ROUSE AVE BRIDGER DR HIGHLANDBLVDSWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD W PEACH ST N FERGUSON AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN S 11TH AVE FRONTAG E R D S 3RD AVE GOLDENSTEIN LN City Limits Growth Policy Boundary Conservation Easements Government & Education Agencies Parcels Up to Twenty Acres ´0 1 2½Miles Bozeman Community Plan 2020 Context Map Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department 259 Starting August 10, 2020 through November 10, 2020PUBLIC COMMENT SUMMARY# DateNameNotesEnvironmental considerationsWildlifeGrowth of distal communitiesClimateHousing AffordabilityDensityLimit eastern expansionImpact on existing HOA/POACost to property ownersPromote growth SWRevise categoriesZoning relationshipFLUM revision(s)NCODHistoric PreservationNeighborhood characterFarmland preservationInfrastructureStrategic PlanSprawl concernsEconomyCitizen rightsTransportationGrowthUncategorized18/7/2020L. Semones 2 lettersXX28/17/2020J. & J. JelinskiX38/17/2020C. LangeX49/10/2020Ronald BozemanX59/15/2020C. DismoreXX69/16/2020L. Semons, J.&J. Jelinski, & C. Lange Staff responseX XXX79/20/2020M. DoreX89/22/2020B. ThompsonXX99/22/2020J. MoorXX109/22/2020J. Moor AddendumXX119/29/2020J. SautherX129/30/2020W. SwearingenXX X X1310/1/2020J. & J. JelinskiXXX1410/5/2020N. Steinmetz 2009 PlanXX X1510/5/2020T. Steimetz 2009 PlanXX X1610/5/2020B. GallikXX1710/5/2020View POA 2009 PlanXX X1810/6/2020M. BrownX1910/6/2020L. Semoned Staff responseXX2010/6/2020G. PooleX2110/6/2020B. SchenckX2210/6/2020P. SchenckX2310/9/2020G. Poole Staff responseXX XXX X2410/9/2020J. BoyerX2510/10/2020S. BelandXX2610/12/2020J. Pritchard Goldenstein IndustrialX2710/12/2020S. NashXXXX2810/13/2020B. Banach Goldenstein IndustrialX2910/14/2020B. O'Grosky Goldenstein IndustrialX3010/16/2020B. Tudsbury Goldenstein IndustrialX3110/16/2020C. Thomas Goldenstein IndustrialX3210/16/2020L. Smith Goldenstein IndustrialX3310/16/2020R. Schmid Goldenstein IndustrialX3410/17/2020L. Miklush Goldenstein IndustrialX3510/17/2020L. Brumbach Goldenstein IndustrialX3610/19/2020D. Lakatos Goldenstein IndustrialX3710/19/2020M & T. Lonner Goldenstein IndustrialX3810/19/2020M. Sadowski Goldenstein IndustrialX3910/19/2020P. Epple Audubon area FLUMX4010/19/2020G. Goodell Goldenstein IndustrialX4110/19/2020B. Huber Goldenstein IndustrialX4210/22/2020N. Schultz AssociationXX X4311/1/2020J. Dimarco Comp evaluationxXX XXX X4411/4/2020P. SpitlerXX4511/5/2020N. Shultz commentsXX4611/9/2020J. JelinskiXXXX11 1325021120132403 11210113131Annexation OtherEnvironmental ConcernsDensity FLUM Community Character260 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3DA56A9C-82F1-492A-81FE-323416463EEC522^»^*v^'^^'^0:^^0*<••»ff01»IVco.PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 20-1RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDINGADOPTION OF THE BOZEMAN COMMUNITY PLAN, AS REQUIRED BY 76-1-603MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED (M.C.A.)WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman Planning Board (Planning Board) has been created byResolution of the Bozeman City Commission as provided for in Title 76-1-101, M.C.A.; andWHEREAS, Section 76-1-106(1), M.C.A. states that the Planning Board is responsible forpreparing growth policies, if requested by the governing body; andWHEREAS, the Bozeman City Commission adopted Resolution 4112 on July 21, 2008 statingtheir intent to develop a growth policy which would contain, in addition to the mandatory elements, thoseWHEREAS, the Bozeman City Commission directed the Planning Board and the staff of the CityofBozeman's Department of Community Development to prepare an update to the Bozeman CommunityPlan originally adopted on June 1, 2009 by Resolution 4163; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board initiated the preparation of an update as requested; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board undertook a variety of public outreach events and practices toencourage public input and participation in the drafting of the update; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board began the preparation of an update to the adopted growth policyand all related documents and materials were properly submitted and reviewed, and all public hearingsand public meetings were advertised in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 76-1-602,M.C.A.; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board held public hearings on July 21, July 28, and August 10, 2020, toreceive and review all written and oral testimony on the draft update of the growth policy; andWHEREAS, Staff presented a summary description of the updated growth policy and answeredquestions for the Planning Board after which the public was invited to give testimony; andPlanning Board Resolution No. 20-1 Recommending Adoption of A Growth PolicyPage 1 of 2261 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3DA56A9C-82F1-492A-81FE-323416463EECWHEREAS, numerous written comments were provided to the Planning Board before and duringthe public hearing, and verbal comments were received during the public hearings, with comments beingsummarized or included in the minutes and other record of the public hearings; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board considered all oral and written comments they had receivedduring the public comment period at their public hearings on July 21, July 28, and August 10,2020; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board closed the public hearing on August 10,2020; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board discussed the issues raised in the public comment as well as itemsof concern to the Planning Board and the requirements of law; andWHEREAS, the Planning Board identified and directed changes to be made to the text and mapsto better reflect the purpose and intent of the Board and in response to questions or comment provided bythe public; andWHEREAS, a motion was made to recommend approval of the growth policy on July 21st, 2020with changes as directed by the Plamiing Board and modifications to the recommended text and map wereapproved on July 28 and August 10, 2020;andWHEREAS, a revised draft incorporating all the directed changes will be prepared and madeavailable for public review prior to the public meeting required to be conducted by the City Commissionprior to any action to adopt a revised growth policy;NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City ofBozeman Planning Board, on a voteof 8 to 1, recommends adoption by the Bozeman City Commission of the draft Bozeman CommunityPlan dated July 21, 2020 with amendments as identified by the Planning Board.DATED THIS 17th DAY OF AUGUST 2020, Resolution No. 20-1DocuSigned by:CM^^Q.•"69?6c?BEeFF1»7.Chris Saunders, AICPCommunity Development ManagerDept. of Community Development\-\N^. \Henry Happel, PresidentCity ofBozeman Plannifig BoardPlanning Board Resolution No. 20-1 Recommending Adoption of A Growth PolicyPage 2 of 2262 Appendix A – Planning Board Motion Summary on July 21, 2020 Draft Bozeman Community Plan. Resolution No. 5132. July 21, 2020 Planning Board meeting changes to the text 1. Page 42. Residential Mixed Use. This category promotes neighborhoods substantially dominated by housing, yet integrated with small-scale commercial and civic uses. The housing can include single- attached and small single-detached dwellings, apartments, and live-work units. Residences should be included on the upper floors of buildings with ground floor commercial uses. If buildings include ground floor commercial uses, residences should be located on upper floors. Variation in building mass, height, and other design characteristics should contribute to a complete and interesting streetscape. 2. Page F-2. Revise Infill definition. Infill. The development or redevelopment of vacant, abandoned, or under-utilized properties within or surrounded by developed areas of the City, and where water, sewer, streets, and fire protection have already been developed and are provided. Infill is located within land subdivided for at least 35 years. 3. Appendix. Page F-2. Neighborhood. An area of Bozeman with characteristics that distinguish it from other areas and that may include distinct economic characteristics, housing types, schools, or boundaries defined by physical barriers, such as major highways and railroads or natural features, such as watercourses or ridges. A neighborhood is often characterized by residents sharing a common identity focused around a school, park, business center, or other feature. As a distinct and identifiable area, often with its own name, neighborhoods are recognized as fostering community spirit and a sense of place, factors recognized as important in community planning. Neighborhood. An area of Bozeman with characteristics that distinguish it from other areas and that may include distinct economic characteristics, housing types, schools, or boundaries defined by physical barriers, such as major highways and railroads or natural features, such as watercourses or ridges. A neighborhood is often characterized by residents sharing a common identity focused around a school, park, business center, or other feature. As a distinct and identifiable area, often with its own name, neighborhoods are recognized as fostering community spirit and a sense of place, factors recognized as important in community planning. 4. Page 4. “Appendix B references the City’s key infrastructure and special topic plans, with descriptions of, and links to each plan document. Included are future and existing plans for 263 transportation, storm water, wastewater, parks and open lands, public safety, economic development, housing, neighborhood plans, and other topics.” 5. Page F-3. “Special Topic Plan. A formal plan prepared for a specific physical resource or function or area of the City which examines the current state, future needs, and recommended means of meeting identified future needs. Examples of topic plans are the Wastewater Facility Plan, Affordable Housing Action Plan, various Neighborhood Plans, and the Transportation Plan.” 6. Page 22. “DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in multi- household, commercial, industrial, and mixed-use all zoning districts to account for revised contemporary building methods and building code changes., and the effect of incremental height changes on meeting goals of this Plan.” 7. Page 22. Add “DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods.” 8. Page 19. Add N-4.3: Revise Design Guidelines within the Conservation Overlay District to distinguish Downtown from the residential neighborhoods both north and south of Downtown. 9. Page 31. Add the Downtown Improvement Plan to the list of “Other Relevant Plans”. 10. Page F-1. Downtown definition. “Downtown. The area subject to the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan and generally bounded by Broadway Avenue, Lamme Street, 5th Avenue, and Olive Street. An area of mixed uses, Downtown is generally characterized by historic architecture and is principally commercial in character.” “Downtown. The area subject to the Downtown Bozeman Improvement Plan bound by the B-3 zoning district which generally extends to Broadway Avenue, Villard Street, 5th Avenue, and Olive Street. Downtown is a mixed-use district but primarily commercial in function and character. Downtown, and particularly Main Street, is distinguished by its historic architecture but also includes notable recent development especially in the areas outside of the historic core.” 11. Page 18. Goal N-1.3. “Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively zoned for single- type housing.” 12. Page 41. Urban Neighborhood. Staff to add language stating that the R-1 district is not eliminated. 13. Page 19. Goal N-4.1. “Continue to recognize and honor the unique history and buildings that contribute to Bozeman’s sense of place through programs, and policy led by both City and community efforts civic action.” 14. Page F-1. Add Commercial Center definition. Commercial Center. A mix of commercial land uses typically serving more than one residential neighborhood, usually a subarea of the city, with services and retail goods. This term also includes small commercial areas 264 providing limited retail goods and services, such as groceries and dry cleaning for nearby residential customers. 15. Page 50. Request to update Zone Map in a timely manner to accurately reflect the revised FLUM. Revise Short Term Action List No. 11.n, “Revise the zoning map in a timely manner to harmonize…” 16. Page 1, 5th paragraph, 3rd sentence. “Its measure of success is continuation of the Bozeman tradition—flourishing, safe, and healthy—and a vibrant place to residelive, work, build a business, and raise a family.” 17. Page 7. Transportation. “Bozeman residents have access to a range of transportation options, including: an extensive sidewalk and trail system,; the six citywide routes offered by Streamline Bus service,; Skyline Bus service to Big Sky,; Galavan transportation service for seniors and disabled individuals people with disabilities,; taxi service and rideshare,; and the bike network, which consists of 18 miles of bike routes, 33 miles of bike lanes, and 23 miles of shared-use paths.” 18. Page 10. Principles Applied in this Plan. Move up the 6th bullet to the 1st bullet and edit as follows: “The City intends to create a healthy, safe, resilient, and sustainable community by incorporating a holistic approach to the design, construction, and operation of buildings, neighborhoods, and the City as a whole. Developments should contribute to these goals and be integrated into their neighborhood and the larger community.” 19. Page 16. Housing Affordability. “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. Housing instability and homelessness are serious public health issues and are exacerbated by the rapid rise in housing prices and the recent economic stress caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.” The positive attributes that make Bozeman a desirable place to live contributed to ever- increasing housing demand. The sale price of homes has more than fully recovered from the 2008 recession for all 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.” 20. Page 16. Theme 2. “Our City desires to be diverse, healthy, and inclusive, defined by our vibrant neighborhoods, quality housing, walkability, excellent schools, numerous parks and trails, and thriving areas of commerce.” 21. Page 26. Edit EPO-1.3. Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational and artistic elements into parks. 265 22. Page 26. Edit EPO-1.4. Research and implement multi-use features within parks to promote increased use and visitation. Ensure Wherever possible, parks are connected to multi-modal transportation options and accessible for people with disabilities. 23. Page 28. Theme 5. Importance, second sentence, “Transportation systems impact the following: 1) livability (in terms of traffic congestion, but also noise, pollution, physical activity, accessibility, safety, and aesthetics); 2) affordability (after housing, transportation is the second largest expense for most households); and 3) sustainability (transportation accounted for more than one third of Bozeman’s 2016 greenhouse gas emissions).” 24. Page 50. Short-Term Action Plan. Add No. 13, Retain firm that specializes in form-based development codes to evaluate the city’s UDC, especially with regard to completing the transition to a form-based code and simplification so that it can be understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff. 25. Page 19. Revise Goal N-2.5. “Ensure that new development includes opportunities for urban agriculture, including rooftop and home gardens, community gardens, and or urban farms.” 26. Page 18. Revise Goal N-1.1. “Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing.” July 28, 2020 Planning Board meeting changes No text changes made at the July 28th meeting. Changes to the Future Land Use Map were made. August 10, 2020 Planning Board meeting changes to the text 27. Page 14. Add the following text below resiliency text. “During the development of the 2020 Community Plan, and at the time of publication, the world has been beset by the COVID Pandemic and the subsequent COVID Financial Crisis. The impacts of COVID reach into the trillions of dollars worldwide. Southwest Montana has fared better with COVID than most communities on a global scale. At the time of publication, it appears that this reduced initial COVID impact is creating significant in-migration of citizens to Bozeman and its environs. Mitigation of the impacts of both COVID and an influx of new citizens to our community will require unprecedented resilience, agility, and outside-the-box thinking, by all participants, the development community, including the City of Bozeman Commission and staff at all stages of the development process.” 28. Page 12. Housing Affordability. Second paragraph. “According to the most recent Bozeman Housing Needs Assessment, an estimated…” 266 29. Page 12. Housing Affordability. Third paragraph. “Bozeman has taken the issue of housing seriously. It developed a 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. At the time of publication, the availability of affordable housing, whether for rent or for purchase, is one of Bozeman’s most serious problems, as demonstrated by both the 2018 EPS Study and the CHAP. Mitigating this shortage is a top priority of the Bozeman City Commission, the Planning Board, and the Community Development Department, in conjunction with local and regional authorities. The three top action items in the Community Affordable Housing Action Plan are: • Ensuring community housing serves the full range of incomes without losing sight of safety net programs for extremely low income and homeless families. This includes safety net rentals below 30% AMI (about $20,000 per year), additional resident and employee rentals up to 80% AMI (about $55,000 per year), and ownership housing up to 150% AMI (about $104,000 per year). • Producing community housing at a rate that exceeds, or at least matches, job growth so that new employees can find homes. • Striving to produce community housing at a rate that matches the spectrum of community housing needs, while also preserving what we have through a target of no net loss of existing community housing stock below 80% AMI. The CHAP objectives include: 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 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 housing, including affordability, is the subject of the detailed CHAP, this Plan does not address housing affordability issues in detail. For additional, up-to-date detail see Community Affordable Housing Advisory Board (CAHAB) and the Community Housing Action Plan.” 30. Page 19. Add N-3.8, “Promote the development of “Missing Middle” housing (e.g. side by side or stacked duplex, triplex, live-work, cottage housing, group living, row houses, townhouses, live work, etc.), as one of the most critical components of affordable housing.” 31. Page 16. Theme 2. Add the following text to bottom of page: 267 “The need for a path to the emergence of small-scale neighborhood commercial development and its ability to bring pedestrian access to coffee shops, groceries, and other daily experiences, and related employment opportunities, is a critical part of Bozeman’s municipal maturation. Such a path is dependent on sufficient population density in such neighborhoods to make neighborhood commercial viable. Typically, this viability cannot be achieved co-emergently with construction of neighborhood housing—for this reason other subsidy approaches must be developed and deployed to make co-emergence possible.” 32. Page 18. Replace Goal N-2.3 with “Investigate and encourage development of commerce concurrent with, or soon after, residential development. Actions, staff, and budgetary resources relating to neighborhood commercial development should be given a high priority.” ## End ## 268 From:Jamie Merrill To:Chris Saunders Cc:Tom Rogers; Chris Kangas Subject:RE: Proposed Future Landuse Map Date:Thursday, October 8, 2020 4:07:01 PM Attachments:Vacant_Undeveloped_Parcels.pdf Chris, please see responses below for future land use related items: Request 1: For the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use future land use designation on existing map (Residential Mixed Use on the new map), how many total acres of the designation and a count of how many locations are on each map? - Existing Map: REMU 446 acres, 6 locations - New Map: RMU 855 acres, 22 locations Request 2: Vacant property in the City over 1/3 acre in size. A update and modification of that map with counts for the number of vacant and undeveloped parcels over 1/3 acre and total acres of vacant and undeveloped property within City limits. And a count or symbol overlay of how many of those total parcels are presently showing a designation in the Planning Projects layer. Don’t need to keep the various stages of review on the planning projects layer. - Number of Vacant Parcels over 1/3 Acre: 279 - Number of Undeveloped Parcels over 1/3 Acre: 66   - Total Acres of Vacant Parcels: 830.2   - Total Acres of Undeveloped Parcels: 1,806.6 - Count of Parcels over 1/3 Acre and are contained within the Planning Projects Layer: 196 Request 3: The map from the third request was stored in a temp file, could you please send us the PDF that you were referring to? We will review the third request and may be able to look into tomorrow or Monday. Request 4: For some reason I cannot attach the Proposed Future Land Use Map with streams because it is too large… Can you access this location?: Z:\Planning\Growth_Policy Otherwise, I can put it in a different shared folder location. Thanks -Jamie From: Chris Saunders <csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET> 269 Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 3:23 PM To: Jamie Merrill <JMerrill@BOZEMAN.NET> Cc: Tom Rogers <TRogers@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: RE: Proposed Future Landuse Map Thanks Jamie. The City Commission asked some questions last night. I am hoping you or the other GIS magicians might be able to help answer. I need to upload by end of day Friday for the packet on Oct 20th. I can do placeholders if absolutely necessary until end of day Monday. 1: For the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use future land use designation on existing map (Residential Mixed Use on the new map), how many total acres of the designation and a count of how many locations are on each map? 2. Kangas did a map for me about a year ago with vacant property in the City over 1/3 acre in size. A update and modification of that map with counts for the number of vacant and undeveloped parcels over 1/3 acre and total acres of vacant and undeveloped property within City limits. And a count or symbol overlay of how many of those total parcels are presently showing a designation in the Planning Projects layer. Don’t need to keep the various stages of review on the planning projects layer. 3. Kangas did a parcel map for the planning area recently that counted the number of parcels in certain size classes. I request also to know how many acres is in each of those size classes. Also please clarify if the conservation easements and public ownership we included or excluded in the parcel size class count. 4. I request a new map of the future land use map overlaid with the streams and rivers layers. The one you just sent will be great as a base. Chris S From: Jamie Merrill <JMerrill@BOZEMAN.NET> Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 12:03 PM To: Chris Saunders <csaunders@BOZEMAN.NET> Subject: Proposed Future Landuse Map Chris, Attached is the proposed future landuse map you had asked about. Let me know if you would like one printed. Thanks Jamie Merrill | GIS Specialist 270 City of Bozeman 20 E. Olive Street - P.O. Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771-1230 P: 406.994.0513 www.bozeman.net 271 INT E R S T A T E 9 0 H W Y S 19TH AVE COTTONWOOD RD S 3RD AVE FRO N T A G E R D DURSTON RD GOOCHHILLRDHUFFINE LN STUCKY RD BAXTER LN W SOURDOUGH RD S 11TH AVE WM A IN ST E VALLEY CENTER RD W BABCOCK ST W OAK ST DAVIS LN B R I D G E R CANYONRD WCOLLEGE ST E MAINSTN ROUSE AVE B R ID G ER DR SWILLSONAVEGRAF ST EKAGYBLVD GOLDENSTEIN LN FRONTAG E R D City of Bozeman Planning Area 0 2 41Miles Revised: 10/30/20 City of Bozeman Strategic Services Department ´ Growth Policy Boundary City Limits 272 Page 1 of 4 Statutory Compliance Tracking Table July 13, 2020 TITLE 76. LAND RESOURCES AND USE CHAPTER 1. PLANNING BOARDS Part 6. Growth Policy 76-1-601. Growth policy -- contents. Required or Authorized Content Response or Where Information is Located (1) A growth policy may cover all or part of the jurisdictional area. Covers entire area (2) The extent to which a growth policy addresses the elements listed in subsection (3) is at the full discretion of the governing body. (3) A growth policy must include: (a) community goals and objectives; Ch. 2 - Themes (b) maps and text describing an inventory of the existing characteristics and features of the jurisdictional area, including: Appendix C – Inventory Report (i) land uses; Ch. 3 – Future Land Use (ii) population; Appendix C – Inventory Report (iii) housing needs; Appendix C – Inventory Report (iv) economic conditions; Appendix C – Inventory Report (v) local services; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans (vi) public facilities; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans (vii) natural resources; Appendix C – Inventory Report (viii) sand and gravel resources; and Appendix C – Inventory Report (ix) other characteristics and features proposed by the planning board and adopted by the governing bodies; No other items included (c) projected trends for the life of the growth policy for each of the following elements: Appendix D – Projections report (i) land use; Ch. 3 – Future Land Use (ii) population; Appendix D – Projections report (iii) housing needs; Appendix D – Projections report (iv) economic conditions; Appendix D – Projections report (v) local services; Appendix B and D – Infrastructure plans (vi) natural resources; and Appendix D – Projections Report (vii) other elements proposed by the planning board and adopted by the governing bodies; No other items included (d) a description of policies, regulations, and other measures to be implemented in order to achieve the goals and objectives Ch. 4 - Implementation 273 Page 2 of 4 established pursuant to subsection (3)(a)[community goals and objectives]; (e) a strategy for development, maintenance, and replacement of public infrastructure, including drinking water systems, wastewater treatment facilities, sewer systems, solid waste facilities, fire protection facilities, roads, and bridges; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plan (f) an implementation strategy that includes: Ch. 4 - Implementation (i) a timetable for implementing the growth policy; Ch. 4 - Implementation (ii) a list of conditions that will lead to a revision of the growth policy; and Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (iii) a timetable for reviewing the growth policy at least once every 5 years and revising the policy if necessary; Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (g) a statement of how the governing bodies will coordinate and cooperate with other jurisdictions that explains: Chapter 2, Theme 7 and Appendix B (i) if a governing body is a city or town, how the governing body will coordinate and cooperate with the county in which the city or town is located on matters related to the growth policy; Chapter 2, Theme 7 and Appendix B (ii) if a governing body is a county, how the governing body will coordinate and cooperate with cities and towns located within the county's boundaries on matters related to the growth policy; NA (h) a statement explaining how the governing bodies will: Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (i) define the criteria in 76-3-608(3)(a) [subdivision and platting act primary review criteria] ; and Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (ii) evaluate and make decisions regarding proposed subdivisions with respect to the criteria in 76-3-608(3)(a); Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (i) a statement explaining how public hearings regarding proposed subdivisions will be conducted; and Ch. 5 – Amendments and Review (j) an evaluation of the potential for fire and wildland fire in the jurisdictional area, including whether or not there is a need to: Gallatin Hazard plan (i) delineate the wildland-urban interface; and (ii) adopt regulations requiring: (A) defensible space around structures; (B) adequate ingress and egress to and from structures and developments to facilitate fire suppression activities; and (C) adequate water supply for fire protection. (4) A growth policy may: (a) include one or more neighborhood plans. A neighborhood plan must be consistent with the growth policy. Optional – Not done with this plan. Existing neighborhood plans are not altered but continue in current status. 274 Page 3 of 4 (b) establish minimum criteria defining the jurisdictional area for a neighborhood plan; Optional - Not done (c) establish an infrastructure plan that, at a minimum, includes: Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (i) projections, in maps and text, of the jurisdiction's growth in population and number of residential, commercial, and industrial units over the next 20 years; Appendix D – Projections report, Appendix E (ii) for a city, a determination regarding if and how much of the city's growth is likely to take place outside of the city's existing jurisdictional area over the next 20 years and a plan of how the city will coordinate infrastructure planning with the county or counties where growth is likely to take place; Appendix B, D, and E (iii) for a county, a plan of how the county will coordinate infrastructure planning with each of the cities that project growth outside of city boundaries and into the county's jurisdictional area over the next 20 years; Not applicable (iv) for cities, a land use map showing where projected growth will be guided and at what densities within city boundaries; Ch. 3 – Future Land Use, Appendix E– Infrastructure Plan (v) for cities and counties, a land use map that designates infrastructure planning areas adjacent to cities showing where projected growth will be guided and at what densities; Ch. 3 – Future Land Use, Appendix E– Infrastructure Plan (vi) using maps and text, a description of existing and future public facilities necessary to efficiently serve projected development and densities within infrastructure planning areas, including, whenever feasible, extending interconnected municipal street networks, sidewalks, trail systems, public transit facilities, and other municipal public facilities throughout the infrastructure planning area. For the purposes of this subsection (4)(c)(vi), public facilities include but are not limited to drinking water treatment and distribution facilities, sewer systems, wastewater treatment facilities, solid waste disposal facilities, parks and open space, schools, public access areas, roads, highways, bridges, and facilities for fire protection, law enforcement, and emergency services; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans Appendix E– Infrastructure Plan (vii) a description of proposed land use management techniques and incentives that will be adopted to promote development within cities and in an infrastructure planning area, including land use management techniques and incentives that address issues of housing affordability; Appendix B – infrastructure Plans, cross references to main document, Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (viii) a description of how and where projected development inside municipal boundaries for cities and inside designated joint infrastructure planning areas for cities and counties could adversely impact: Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (A) threatened or endangered wildlife and critical wildlife habitat and corridors; Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (B) water available to agricultural water users and facilities; Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan 275 Page 4 of 4 (C) the ability of public facilities, including schools, to safely and efficiently service current residents and future growth; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans, Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (D) a local government's ability to provide adequate local services, including but not limited to emergency, fire, and police protection; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans, Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (E) the safety of people and property due to threats to public health and safety, including but not limited to wildfire, flooding, erosion, water pollution, hazardous wildlife interactions, and traffic hazards; Appendix B – Infrastructure Plans, Joint Hazard Plan, Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (F) natural resources, including but not limited to forest lands, mineral resources, sand and gravel resources, streams, rivers, lakes, wetlands, and ground water; and Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan G) agricultural lands and agricultural production; and Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (ix) a description of measures, including land use management techniques and incentives, that will be adopted to avoid, significantly reduce, or mitigate the adverse impacts identified under subsection (4)(c)(viii). Appendix E – Infrastructure Plan (d) include any elements required by a federal land management agency in order for the governing body to establish coordination or cooperating agency status as provided in 76-1-607. Not applicable (5) The planning board may propose and the governing bodies may adopt additional elements of a growth policy in order to fulfill the purpose of this chapter. Optional – Not done with this plan 276