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