HomeMy WebLinkAbout20147 Front Setback SR and Draft Ordinance 2061Page 1 of 9
20147 Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment,
Ordinance 2061
Public Hearings: Zoning Commission meeting is on November 23, 2020.
City Commission meeting is on December 15, 2020.
Project Description: Revise definitions and references to clarify a consistent meaning and
application of front setbacks in all zoning district. No changes to dimensional
standards are included with this amendment. Revise affected sections to implement
the revisions.
Project Location: Revision to the text is applicable City-wide
Recommendation: Meets standards for approval.
Recommended Zoning Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff
report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20147 and
move to recommend approval of Ordinance 2061.
Recommended City Commission Motion: Having reviewed and considered the staff
report, application materials, public comment, and all information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 20147,
Ordinance 2061 and move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 2061.
Report: November 17, 2020
Staff Contact: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Agenda Item Type: Action - Legislative
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report is based on the application materials submitted and public comment received to
date.
Unresolved Issues
None.
Project Summary
A lack of clarity has been identified relating to certain definitions and how they apply to
establishing where a front setback is applicable. It is important for the City’s regulations to
be clear and effective, especially as affecting infill projects which are often occurring in
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 2 of 9
constrained circumstances. The amendments improve consistency and clarity of definitions
and terms. There is no change to the physical dimension of a front setback in any district with
this amendment. This amendment is a clarification and does not change how standards were
previously applied or are applied at this time.
Strategic Plan
4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth
Continue developing an in-depth understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing
and proactively address change in a balanced and coordinated manner.
b) Develop and Align Infill Policies - Develop, adopt and align city policies for infill and
redevelopment, economic development and public infrastructure.
4.4 Vibrant Downtown, Districts & Centers
Promote a healthy, vibrant Downtown, Midtown, and other commercial districts and
neighborhood centers – including higher densities and intensification of use in these key
areas
Zoning Commission
The Zoning Commission will hold their public hearing on November 23, 2020.
City Commission Alternatives
1. Provisional adoption of the ordinance;
2. Provisional adoption of the ordinance with modifications to the recommended ordinance;
3. Denial of the ordinance based on findings of non-compliance with the applicable criteria
contained within the staff report; or
4. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff to
supply additional information or to address specific items.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 1
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 1
Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................... 2
Zoning Commission ............................................................................................................ 2
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 3 of 9
City Commission Alternatives ............................................................................................ 2
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 3
SECTION 2 - TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ....................... 3
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ........................................................... 7
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND ................ 8
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ...................................................... 8
APPENDIX C - APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF ...................... 8
FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................... 8
ATTACHMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 9
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the criteria established for a zone map amendment, the Staff recommends
approval as submitted.
The Zoning Commission will hold a public hearing on this amendment on November 23,
2020, at 6 p.m. and will forward a recommendation to the Commission on the Zone Map
amendment.
The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the zone map amendment on December
15, 2020, at 6 p.m.
SECTION 2 - TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
In considering applications for approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission must consider the following criteria (letters A-K). As an amendment is a
legislative action, the Commission has broad latitude to determine a policy direction. The
burden of proof that the application should be approved lies with the applicant.
A zone text amendment must be in accordance with the growth policy (criteria A) and be
designed to secure safety from fire and other dangers (criteria B), promote public health,
public safety, and general welfare (criteria C), and facilitate the provision of transportation,
water, sewerage, schools, parks and other public requirements (criteria D). Therefore, to
approve a zone map amendment the Commission must find Criteria A-D are met.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 4 of 9
In addition, the Commission must also consider criteria E-K, and may find the zone map
amendment to be positive, neutral, or negative with regards to these criteria. To approve the
zone text amendment, the Commission must find the positive outcomes of the amendment
outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. In determining whether the criteria are met,
Staff considers the entire body of regulations for land development. Standards which prevent
or mitigated negative impacts are incorporated throughout the entire municipal code but are
principally in Chapter 38, Unified Development Code.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Yes. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Chapter 5, p. 73, in the section titled Review
Criteria For Zoning Amendments And Their Application, discusses how the various criteria
in 76-2-304 MCA are applied locally. Application varies depending on whether an
amendment is for the zoning map or for the text of Chapter 38, BMC.
“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.”
The proposed amendment does not change the zoning map. Therefore, it is unnecessary to
analyze compliance with the future land use map.
The basic planning precepts, page 20, includes “The needs of new and existing development
coexist and they should remain in balance; neither should overwhelm the other.” Clarity of
meaning and application helps ensure consistent application of existing standards as new
applications are submitted. This supports balance and harmonious coexistence for existing
and new development.
“N-3.7 Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes, and small floor plans, especially
through mechanisms such as density bonuses.” Compact neighborhoods have less room and
the importance of consistent application of standards is heightened due to how near the
buildings are to each other. This proposed amendment improves clarity of meaning and
consistency of application.
No conflicts with the growth policy text or future land use map have been identified.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Yes. Previously adopted standards in Chapter 38, BMC address this criteria. Those standards
are not being changed. Front setbacks provide locations for telecommunications which
supports emergency services dispatch and response. The proposed amendment provides
additional clarity about when front setbacks are required.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 5 of 9
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes. Front setbacks serve multiple purposes including supporting privacy of adjacent homes,
enabling provision of private utilities such as power and telecommunications, provide for
water infiltration thereby lessening storm water runoff, and provide green spaces in an urban
environment. All of these purposes advance public well-being.
No changes to dimensions of required setbacks in individual districts are changed with this
amendment. All established setbacks have been found to meet this criteria.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks
and other public requirements.
Yes. The City conducts extensive planning for municipal transportation, water, sewer,
parks, and other facilities and services provided by the City. The adopted plans allow the
City to consider existing conditions and identify enhancements needed to provide additional
service needed by new development. The City implements these plans through its capital
improvements program that identifies individual projects, project construction scheduling,
and financing of construction. Schools are provided by School District 7 and allowed uses
are not affected by this amendment.
As stated in 38.300.020.C, the designation of a zoning district does not guarantee approval of
new development until the City verifies the availability of needed infrastructure. All zoning
districts in Bozeman enable a wide range of uses and intensities. At time of future subdivision
or site plan review the need for individual services can be more precisely determined. No
subdivision or site plan is approved without demonstration of adequate capacity.
38.300.020.C, “Placement of any given zoning district on an area depicted on the zoning
map indicates a judgment on the part of the city that the range of uses allowed within that
district are generally acceptable in that location. It is not a guarantee of approval for any
given use prior to the completion of the appropriate review procedure and compliance with
all of the applicable requirements and development standards of this chapter and other
applicable policies, laws and ordinances. It is also not a guarantee of immediate
infrastructure availability or a commitment on the part of the city to bear the cost of
extending services.”
The City’s standards specify placement of easements along the front of lots to enable
provision of utilities with new development; and with redevelopment where appropriate. No
changes to dimensions of required setbacks in individual districts are changed with this
amendment. All established setbacks have been found to meet this criteria.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Neutral. No changes to dimensions of required setbacks in individual districts are changed
with this amendment. All established setbacks have been found to meet this criteria.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 6 of 9
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Neutral. The proposed amendment does not modify development standards for circulation,
parking, traffic control, or other standards related to this criteria.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Yes. Establishment of setbacks is an important component of compatibility. Setbacks define
the open areas required on private property. The interface between streets and buildings is a
key element in defining site character, coordinating utility locations, and other elements of
compatibility. The proposed amendment brings improved clarity and consistency to several
related standards affecting setbacks between a street and buildings.
H. Character of the district.
Neutral. Section 76-2-302, MCA says “…legislative body may divide the municipality into
districts of the number, shape, and area as are considered best suited to carry out the purposes
[promoting health, safety, morals, or the general welfare of the community] of this part.”
Emphasis added.
This proposal amends the text, not the zoning map. All zoning districts have established
setbacks. No element of this amendment modifies the setback standards of any zoning district.
The character of the districts created by those standards remains as presently set. The
amendment provides clarity and consistency in application of the previously adopted setback
standards for front setbacks.
As noted above, the City Commission has latitude in considering the geographical extents of a
zoning district. Application of any municipal zoning district to the subject property will alter
the existing character of the subject property which is a rural individual home with agricultural
buildings. It is not expected that zoning freeze the character of an area in perpetuity. Rather, it
provides a structured method to consider changes to the character.
The City has defined compatible development as:
“The use of land and the construction and use of structures which is in harmony with
adjoining development, existing neighborhoods, and the goals and objectives of the city's
adopted growth policy. Elements of compatible development include, but are not limited to,
variety of architectural design; rhythm of architectural elements; scale; intensity; materials;
building siting; lot and building size; hours of operation; and integration with existing
community systems including water and sewer services, natural elements in the area,
motorized and non-motorized transportation, and open spaces and parks. Compatible
development does not require uniformity or monotony of architectural or site design, density
or use.”
The City has adopted many standards to identify and avoid or mitigate demonstrable negative
impacts of development. These will support the ability of future development to be compatible
with adjacent development and uphold the residential character of the area.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 7 of 9
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Neutral. No changes to allowed uses in zoning districts happen with this amendment. No
changes to dimensions of required setbacks in individual districts are changed with this
amendment. All established setbacks have been found to meet this criteria.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Neutral. This change will only apply to applications occurring after adoption, should
adoption occur. The amendment does not change applicable standards for size of setbacks.
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional
area.
Neutral. The proposed amendment does not alter allowed uses in zoning districts or the
zoning map. Consistency of regulations does make it easier to plan for and execute
development throughout the City.
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS
IN THE CASE OF WRITTEN PROTEST AGAINST SUCH CHANGES SIGNED BY THE
OWNERS OF 25% OR MORE OF THE AREA OF THE LOTS WITHIN THE AMENDMENT
AREA OR THOSE LOTS OR UNITS WITHIN 150 FEET FROM A LOT INCLUDED IN A PROPOSED CHANGE, THE AMENDMENT SHALL NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE EXCEPT BY THE FAVORABLE VOTE OF TWO-THIRDS OF THE PRESENT AND VOTING MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION.
The City will accept written protests from property owners against the proposal
described in this report until the close of the public hearing before the City
Commission. Pursuant to 76-2-305, MCA, a protest may only be submitted by the owner(s)
of real property within the area affected by the proposal or by owner(s) of real property that
lie within 150 feet of an area affected by the proposal. The protest must be in writing and
must be signed by all owners of the real property. In addition, a sufficient protest must: (i)
contain a description of the action protested sufficient to identify the action against which the
protest is lodged; and (ii) contain a statement of the protestor's qualifications (including
listing all owners of the property and the physical address), to protest the action against
which the protest is lodged, including ownership of property affected by the action. Signers
are encouraged to print their names after their signatures. A person may in writing withdraw
a previously filed protest at any time prior to final action by the City Commission. Protests
must be delivered to the Bozeman City Clerk, 121 North Rouse Ave., PO Box 1230,
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 8 of 9
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND
BACKGROUND
The City processes hundreds of applications each year. As the code is applied to those
applications issues appear where applicants and designers understand the code differently
than City Staff. The Staff monitors for those “frequent flier” issues to understand where the
code is not adequately clear. Questions of how various definitions affect where a front
setback is properly applied has recently come up on several projects.
The City used to have a different code structure for front setbacks that differentiated between
“front” and “corner-side” setbacks. This was established because front setbacks used to be
much larger in residential and many non-residential districts. When the front setback was
reduced to the same size as corner-side setbacks it became unnecessary to have two ways to
talk about different dimensional standards for the area where lots are adjacent to a street. The
term corner-side setback was removed and revisions made to match up the text to all
circumstances where a street is adjacent to a lot. It has become apparent that additional work
is needed to make the code as clear as is desired.
The proposed amendment is primarily changes to definitions. It does not change any
dimensional setback for a building from a street.
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice for text amendments must meet the standards of 38.220.410 & 420. Notice was
published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle as required and contained all required elements.
Notice was provided at least 15 days before the Zoning Commission public hearing, and not
more than 45 days prior to the City Commission public hearing. Hearing dates are on the first
page of this report.
APPENDIX C - APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF
Applicant: City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230, Bozeman MT 59771
Representative: Department of Community Development, City of Bozeman, PO Box 1230,
Bozeman MT 59771
Report By: Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed
by this Amendment.
Staff Report for the Front Setback Definition Text Amendment Page 9 of 9
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Ordinance 2061
Page 1 of 6
ORDINANCE NO. 2061
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA AMENDING SECTION 38.350.060 FENCES WALLS AND HEDGES,
38.700.070. – F DEFINITIONS, SECTION 38.700.110 – L DEFINTIONS, AND SECTION
38.700.170 – S DEFINITIONS, TO REVISE THE DEFINITION OF “FRONT SETBACK”
IN THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE AND HARMONIZE ITS MEANING AND
APPLICATION.
WHEREAS, the City of Bozeman (the “City”) has adopted land development and use
standards to protect public health, safety and welfare and otherwise execute the purposes of Section
76-2-304, MCA; and
WHEREAS, City is committed to reviewing and improving the Unified Development
Code; and
WHEREAS, the City has developed a platform to submit revisions to the Unified
Development Code to improve overall functionality and ease of use; and
WHEREAS, it has been identified that the definition of “Front Setback” is inadequately
clear in conjuction with the definition of “Lot Frontage”; and
WHEREAS, definitions for and applications of setbacks have significant impacts on infill
and other small lot development; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the City and public welfare to clarify the definition of
“Front Setback.”
Ordinance 2061, Revise Front Setback Definition
Page 2 of 6
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
That paragraph 38.350.060 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended as follows:
Sec. 38.350.060. - Fences, walls and hedges.
A. Location and height. Except as provided in section 38.400.100, fences, walls and hedges in any district may be located on lot lines, provided such fences, walls and hedges comply with the following height requirements:
1. Do not exceed six feet in height in any required rear or required side setback. Fences
exceeding six feet in height must be subject to the minimum setback requirements of the district in which such fences are located. Decorative post caps may exceed the height limit by no more than one additional foot. Fences in excess of six feet in height require a building permit before installation may commence. Fences may not exceed eight feet in height.
a. A gate may be provided which defines an entrance point. The gate may have a defining structure so long as the defining structure is not more than one foot wide on either side of the gate. Gate structure heights may not exceed twice the allowed fence height.
2. For lots with one front setback, do not exceed four feet in height in the front setback. Lots
with more than one front setback, do not exceed four feet in the setback adjacent to the street on which the property has its assigned address. In non-addressed front setbacks, fences must not exceed four feet in height in the portion of the front setback that is adjacent to the building façade nearest the front setback. Do not exceed four feet in height in any required front lot line setback or any portion of a required wider front lot line that
is forward of the rear edge of the building façade nearest the front lot line setback. Decorative post caps may exceed the height limit by no more than one additional foot.
3. Fences used in an agricultural pursuit to retain stock animals or for public safety must be excepted.
4. The height of fences located in the B-3 district must meet the requirements of this section
for any provided, not required, setbacks.
Ordinance 2061, Revise Front Setback Definition
Page 3 of 6
Section 2
That section 38.700.070 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended as follows with all other
portions of the section remaining unchanged:
Front setback. A setback extending across the full width of all sides of a lot that abuts a street.
across the full width of the lot between two side lot lines, the depth of which is the least distance
between the street right-of-way and the front building line;
Section 3
That section 38.700.110 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended as follows with all other
portions of the section remaining unchanged:
Lot measurements.
A. Lot depth. The horizontal distance of a line measured at a right angle to the front lot
line and running between the front lot line and rear lot line of a lot. B. Lot width. The distance as measured in a straight line, between side lot lines at the points of intersection with the required front building line. C. Lot frontage. The horizontal distance between the side lot lines measured at the point where the side lot lines intersect the street right-of-way. All sides of a lot that abuts a
street are considered frontage. On curvilinear streets, the arc between the side lot lines is considered the lot frontage. D. Lot area. The total horizontal area within the boundary lines of a lot.
Lot line, front. In the case of an interior lot, a line separating the lot from the street, in the case of a
or a corner lot, a line separating the narrowest street frontage of the lot from the street and in the
Ordinance 2061, Revise Front Setback Definition
Page 4 of 6
case of a double frontage or through lot, a line separating the lot from the street from which a drive
access may be permitted by the city.
Section 4
That section 38.700.170 of the Bozeman Municipal Code be amended as follows with all other
portions of the section remaining unchanged:
Sec. 38.700.070. - S definitions.
Street frontage. Any property line separating a lot from a street other than an alley.; the front lot line.
Section 4
Repealer.
All provisions of the ordinances of the City of Bozeman in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance are, and the same are hereby, repealed and all other provisions of the ordinances of
the City of Bozeman not in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance shall remain in full force
and effect.
Section 5
Savings Provision.
This ordinance does not affect the rights and duties that matured, penalties that were
incurred or proceedings that were begun before the effective date of this ordinance. All other
provisions of the Bozeman Municipal Code not amended by this ordinance shall remain in full
force and effect.
Section 6
Severability.
Ordinance 2061, Revise Front Setback Definition
Page 5 of 6
That should any sentence, paragraph, subdivision, clause, phrase or section of this
ordinance be adjudged or held to be unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, the same shall not affect
the validity of this ordinance as a whole, or any part or provision thereof, other than the part so
decided to be invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, and shall not affect the validity of the Bozeman
Municipal Code as a whole.
Section 7
Codification.
This Ordinance shall be codified as indicated in Section 1-4.
Section 8
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the _________ day of ______________,
2020.
____________________________________ CYNDY ANDRUS Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk
Ordinance 2061, Revise Front Setback Definition
Page 6 of 6
FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the
City of Bozeman, Montana on second reading at a regular session thereof held on the ___ of
____________________, 2020. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 2020.
_________________________________
CYNDY ANDRUS Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________ MIKE MAAS City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________ GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney