HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-19-21 Planning Board Agenda & Packet MaterialsA.Call Meeting to Order
B.Disclosures
C.Changes to the Agenda
D.Approval of Minutes
D.1 Minutes Approval for 01-14-20 and 04-05-21(Rogers)
E.Public Comment
Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record.This is the time for
individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the Committee.There will also be
an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments pertaining to that item.Please
limit your comments to three minutes.
F.Special Presentations
G.Action Items
G.1 South University District Phase 3 Amended Plat and Subdivision Variance to Revise
Conditions of Approval for Application 19090 a 10 Lot Major Subdivision Located Southeast
of the Intersection of Kagy Boulevard and S. 19th Avenue Relating to Installation of
Infrastructure and On-Site Construction, Application 21066(Saunders)
G.2 Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 – Improvements and Guarantees – of the Bozeman
Municipal Code to Allow Greater Flexibility to Concurrently Construct Improvements and
Development Projects, Require Installation of Sidewalks Commensurate with All Other
Improvements to Provide Accessibility for Everyone, and to Generally Clean up the
BMC.(Rischke)
G.3 Introduction to subdivision review process in the City of Bozeman.(Rogers)
G.4 Fifth work session to define and refine Planning Board goals for 2020 and implementation of
the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The initial discussion took place on December 21, 2020
and the second work session took place on March 1, 2021.  And April 5, 2021(Happel)
H.FYI/Discussion
I.Adjournment
THE PLANNING BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
PB AGENDA
Monday, April 19, 2021
1
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at trogers@bozeman.net
This board generally meets the 2nd and 4th Monday of each month from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require
assistance, please contact our ADA coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
WebEx Meeting Information
Via Webex:
https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php?
MTID=e4b65e8f59982009c546f1e096516c35d
Click the Register link, enter the required information, and click submit.
Click Join Now to enter the meeting
Via Phone:
This is for listening only if you cannot watch the stream or channel 190
• Call-in toll number (US/Canada ): 1-650-479-3208
• Access code: 182 443 1558
Public Comment:
If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda, please send an email to
agenda@ bozeman.net prior to 12:00pm on Monday, April 19th, 2021. You may also comment by
visiting the City's public comment page.
You can also comment by joining the Webex meeting. If you do join the Webex meeting, we ask you
please be patient in helping us work through this online meeting. If you are not able to join the Webex
meeting and would like to provide oral comment you may send a request to agenda@bozeman.net
with your phone number, the item(s) you wish to comment on, and someone will call you during the
meeting to provide an opportunity to comment. You may also send the above information via text to
406-224-3967.
As always, the meeting will be streamed through the City's video page (click the Streaming Live in the
drop down menu), and available in the City on cable channel 190.
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
SUBJECT:Minutes Approval for 01-14-20 and 04-05-21
MEETING DATE:April 19, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Suggested Motion:
I move to approve the meeting minutes for January 14th, 2020
I move to approve the meeting minutes for April 5th, 2021
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.2 Community Engagement: Broaden and deepen engagement of the
community in city government, innovating methods for inviting input from
the community and stakeholders.
BACKGROUND:None
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:1. Approve meeting minutes with corrections.
2. Do not approve meeting minutes.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None
Attachments:
01-14-20 Planning Board Minutes.pdf
04-05-21 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
Report compiled on: April 14, 2021
3
City Planning Board
Tuesday, January 14, 2020 | 6:00 PM | City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 06:02:26 PM (00:02:16) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call
Present Were:
Lauren Waterton
Chris Mehl
Henry Happel
George Thompson
Cathy Costakis
Mark Egge
B. 06:02:44 PM (00:02:34) Changes to the Agenda
C. Minutes for Approval (None)
D. 06:02:53 PM (00:02:43) Public Comment – Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice
for the record. This is the time for individuals to comment on matters falling within the purview of the
Committee. There will also be an opportunity in conjunction with each action item for comments
pertaining to that item. Please limit your comments to three minutes.
E. 06:03:15 PM (00:03:05) Action Items
1. Growth Policy Future Land Use Map - Continuation of Public Hearing
Planning Board memo – 01.14.2020
Planning Board edits from Version 1 12.2019 hearing
12-17-19 Egge suggested edits
FLUM GP Comments 1.8.20
FLUM GP Comments Map 1.8.20
Revised Land Use and Zoning Chart
Draft Bozeman Community Plan V8
Draft Bozeman Community Plan Appendices
Chairman Happel announced that the Public Hearing will continue where they previously left off which was at
Chapter 3.
06:03:45 PM (00:03:35) City Planner Tom Rogers informed board members that a summary of comments
provided by the interactive future land use map comment tool is available for viewing.
06:07:33 PM (00:07:23) Board member Jerry Pape joined the meeting
4
06:07:44 PM (00:07:34) Chairman Happel introduced Chapter 3, mentioning that there has been extensive
public comment on the chapter that the board should consider.
06:08:30 PM (00:08:20) Board member Costakis commented that she does not understand the first couple
paragraphs as it related to the land use map. She mentioned that the opening of the paragraph should be used
to educate people on what the land use map is and the purpose it serves.
06:10:08 PM (00:09:58) Board member Pape commented that the phrase “maintaining the Bozeman feel”
should not be used in the document and the goal should be changed to maintaining Bozeman’s function rather
than its feel.
06:12:03 PM (00:11:53) Chairman Happel asked staff members if they would be able to draft an addition to the
document to address board member’s issues.
06:12:09 PM (00:11:59) City Planner Saunders replied that an addition is something that is do-able by City staff
and recommended that there be a motion and vote on the changes to signal concurrence amongst the board.
06:12:49 PM (00:12:39) Motion: To approve changes to the Growth Policy Future Land Use Map: Jerry Pape
06:12:56 PM (00:12:46) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
06:12:59 PM (00:12:49) Board member Pape spoke to his motion.
06:13:46 PM (00:13:36) Board member Costakis spoke to her second mentioning that the City of Missoula does
a good job of explaining their document, suggesting that staff members possibly take point from that document.
06:14:13 PM (00:14:03) Vote on the motion: Motion carried unanimously.
06:15:21 PM (00:15:11) Chairman Happel directed board members to page 41 of the document.
06:15:24 PM (00:15:14) Board member Pape commented that the term “urban density" does not properly
describe the city population density.
06:17:23 PM (00:17:13) Chairman Happel directed board members to page 42 of the document.
06:17:34 PM (00:17:24) Board member Egge commented that the city should recognize that having 5 lane urban
Arterial streets is not conducive to a pedestrian friendly environment.
06:18:35 PM (00:18:25) Motion: To revise language to indicate multiple transportation modes: Mark Egge
06:18:46 PM (00:18:36) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
5
06:19:10 PM (00:19:00) Board member Thompson commented that he finds challenges with using the term
“multi-modal” as members of the public may not understand what that term means.
06:19:38 PM (00:19:28) Chairman Happel mentioned that there is a glossary for the document which should
include the definition to “multi-modal”
06:20:11 PM (00:20:01) Board member Pape commented that he does not support Board member Egge’s
motion.
06:24:25 PM (00:24:15) Board member Costakis commented that she does not believe that the change of
language indicating multiple transportation modes would cause the issues that Board member Pape outlined.
06:25:23 PM (00:25:13) Board member Egge restated his motion.
06:25:45 PM (00:25:35) Vote on the motion: Motion carries 5-2
06:26:05 PM (00:25:55) Chairman Happel directed members to page 43
06:26:15 PM (00:26:05) Motion: To revise the first sentence of the second paragraph to read “developments in
this land use are should be (strike the next clause) integrated with transit and non-automotive routes.” This
would strike the clause that says “located on one or two quadrants of intersections of the arterial and/or
collector streets.” Mark Egge
06:27:21 PM (00:27:11) Motion Seconded
06:28:24 PM (00:28:14) Board member Pape requested that board members think carefully about changes they
are making to the streets and the consequences that could come about from doing so.
06:30:06 PM (00:29:56) Vote on the motion: motion fails 4-3
06:30:34 PM (00:30:24) Chairman Happel directed board members to page 44.
06:30:43 PM (00:30:33) Board member Pape commented that it is important to remember that there are going
to be more “community cores” coming about as the population grows.
06:31:34 PM (00:31:24) Board member Costakis commented that she supports Chris Mehlman’s public
comment and read it aloud for the board.
06:33:06 PM (00:32:56) Chairman Happel asked if Board member Pape would prefer the section to be titled
“downtown core” rather than “community core”
6
06:34:46 PM (00:34:36) Motion: To change the section title to read “traditional core” rather than “community
core.” Jerry Pape
06:34:54 PM (00:34:44) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
06:35:01 PM (00:34:51) Staff Planner Chris Saunders asked for clarification on what the actual language of the
motion was.
06:35:07 PM (00:34:57) Chairman Happel commented that the language used will be changed to “traditional
core”
06:35:40 PM (00:35:30) Vote on the motion: motion carries 5-2
06:37:51 PM (00:37:41) Chairman Happel asked Board Member Coatakis if she wanted to insert the public
comment into the Future Land Use Document.
06:38:04 PM (00:37:54) Board Member Costakis replied that she would like the language added.
06:38:16 PM (00:38:06) Motion: To replace the current language in section 4 with the language in Chris
Mehlman’s public comment.
06:38:28 PM (00:38:18) Motion Seconded
06:38:32 PM (00:38:22) Vote on the motion: motion carried unanimously.
06:39:26 PM (00:39:16) Board member Egge suggested the insertion of a statement that read “relative to other
land use categories, regional commercial is more automobile oriented.”
06:40:23 PM (00:40:13) Motion fails for lack of a second.
06:40:39 PM (00:40:29) Chairman Happel shared a public comment in regard to residential usage in regional
commercial areas.
06:42:49 PM (00:42:39) Motion: To state “while such developments may begin with first and second floor retail
as a primary use, they could evolve to residential being a primary use with additional floors.” Jerry Pape
06:43:07 PM (00:42:57) Staff Planner Saunders commented that the language in the public comment would
remove the word “primary” and inserting the word “ground level”
06:43:50 PM (00:43:40) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
7
06:44:26 PM (00:44:16) Motion: For a friendly amendment to remove the words along the lines of what the City
Statutes suggested which say residential space and then eliminate should not be a primary use and so it should
just read “residential space should be located above the first floor.”: Chris Mehl
06:44:39 PM (00:44:29) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
06:45:51 PM (00:45:41) Vote on the Motion: motion carried unanimously.
06:47:00 PM (00:46:50) Chairman Happel directed board members to Section 6.
06:47:30 PM (00:47:20) Board member Pape indicated that there are several definitions for “industrial” that
have presented themselves that are not represented in the document.
06:48:37 PM (00:48:27) Planner Saunders commented that the current language is suitable for the growth
policy.
06:49:12 PM (00:49:02) Motion: To change “significant transportation corridor” to “arterial”
06:49:23 PM (00:49:13) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
06:49:36 PM (00:49:26) Chris Mehl commented that he does not believe that the amendment is necessary.
06:49:44 PM (00:49:34) Motion Rescinded: Board member Pape rescinded his motion.
06:49:52 PM (00:49:42) Chairman Happel directed board members to Section 7.
06:50:04 PM (00:49:54) Board member Waterton commented on public comment that has been received and
asked staff to define the difference between a public land and an institution.
06:53:39 PM (00:53:29) Motion: to add the word “parks” since it is mentioned throughout the section: Jerry
Pape
06:54:16 PM (00:54:06) Motion Seconded: George Thompson.
06:54:46 PM (00:54:36) Vote on the Motion: motion carried 6 – 1
06:55:18 PM (00:55:08) Motion: to divide the section into two categories: Parks and open space into one, public
lands and institutions in the other: Lauren Waterton
06:55:32 PM (00:55:22) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
06:56:19 PM (00:56:09) Vote on the Motion: motion carried unanimously.
8
06:56:59 PM (00:56:49) Chairman Happel directed board members to the final page of the document.
06:58:18 PM (00:58:08) Motion: To accept the comments concerning the North East neighborhoods, submitted
by Brian Caldwell: Chris Mehl
06:58:27 PM (00:58:17) Motion Seconded: Jerry Pape
07:14:00 PM (01:13:50) Chairman Happel invited Brian Caldwell to the podium to speak on behalf of the public
comment he submitted in writing.
07:14:06 PM (01:13:56) Brian Caldwell (321 N. Montana) commented on the benefits of adding a NE Historic
Mixed Use Zoning District.
07:17:54 PM (01:17:44) Board member Egge requested a friendly amendment to Mayor Mehl’s motion stating
that Mr. Caldwell had offered two options to the future land use map and would like the mayor to clarify his
motion to specify option number two.
07:19:04 PM (01:18:54) Friendly amendment accepted by Mayor Mehl and board member Pape.
07:20:49 PM (01:20:39) Chairman Happel commented that he will be supporting the motion.
07:21:16 PM (01:21:06) Vote on the motion: motion carries unanimously
07:22:20 PM (01:22:10) Chairman Happel asked board members to speak to any additional future land use
issues not related to the public comments.
07:22:23 PM (01:22:13) Motion: to request that staff review the map in light of affordable housing issues to
ensure that those areas were sufficiently mixed use.
07:23:23 PM (01:23:13) Motion seconded: George Thompson
07:24:01 PM (01:23:51) Vote on the motion: motion carries unanimously
07:26:40 PM (01:26:30) Chairman Happel reviewed written public comments that were submitted prior to the
meeting and requested that board members and staff respond to the comments.
07:27:20 PM (01:27:10) Chairman Happel directed board members to the public comment provided from the
owners of Spire Climbing Center where they requested that the board re-designate a piece of property, recently
acquired by them, to be Regional Commercial and Services which would enable them to obtain zoning that
would allow for them to build a building up to 60 feet high.
9
07:39:47 PM (01:39:37) Motion: To adopt the requested changes: Mark Egge
07:39:50 PM (01:39:40) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
07:39:53 PM (01:39:43) Board member Egge spoke to his motion.
07:40:38 PM (01:40:28) Vote on the motion: Motion carries unanimously.
07:41:50 PM (01:41:40) Board member Waterton commented on public comment that had been received from
Intrinsik Architecture in regards to the property within the Story Mill area where they requested for the land to
be zoned Community Commercial Mixed Use because the area to the south is burdened with floodplain which
will result in limited utility regardless of the designation.
07:49:17 PM (01:49:07) Motion: To ask staff to reach out and contact this person and ask for their future
development ideas: Jerry Pape
07:49:38 PM (01:49:28) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
07:49:51 PM (01:49:41) Board member Rogers clarified the motion language.
07:51:22 PM (01:51:12) Chairman Happel directed board members back to the initial question of if they wanted
to grant Intrinsik’s request.
07:51:51 PM (01:51:41) Board member Pape commented that he supported the proposal and that he read
through it thoroughly and that he understands the intent in the long run.
07:52:22 PM (01:52:12) Board member Waterton commented that since the property owner took the time to
hire professionals and got everything put out on paper, and with hearing from staff that they would support the
request, that she would lean more towards supporting the request.
07:53:23 PM (01:53:13) Board member Pape withdrew his motion.
07:53:29 PM (01:53:19) Motion: To approve the request: Chris Mehl
07:53:29 PM (01:53:19) Motion Seconded: Jerry Pape
07:53:35 PM (01:53:25) Vote on the motion: Motion carries unanimously.
07:54:07 PM (01:53:57) Motion: to designate what would become the in-holding piece in the same way that
everything else was just designated: Jerry Pape
07:54:19 PM (01:54:09) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
10
07:54:49 PM (01:54:39) Vote on the motion: Motion carries unanimously.
07:55:24 PM (01:55:14) Chairman Happel outlined the public comments that were received anonymously and
asked staff to lead the board through the comments.
07:57:47 PM (01:57:37) Board member Pape suggested that the board give staff more time to sort through the
public comment as it was difficult to correlate.
08:00:23 PM (02:00:13) Staff liaison Rogers informed the board that Mr. Henderson the strategic services
director, would like to be present for the discussion of Chapter 4: Implementation, and encouraged the board to
pick up with the chapter at the next meeting.
08:02:21 PM (02:02:11) Chairman Happel inquired if the board would like to move on to Chapter 5.
08:03:18 PM (02:03:08) Board member Egge spoke to public comments regarding the future land use map.
08:04:21 PM (02:04:11) Motion: to change the land use designation to community commercial mixed use within
the rectangular node at the corner of Oak and Fowler: Mark Egge
08:04:42 PM (02:04:32) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
08:05:19 PM (02:05:09) Board member Pape voiced concern over the ability to make a commercial node happen
in the requested area.
08:06:37 PM (02:06:27) Planner Saunders voiced concerns over the viability of the request due to lack of access.
08:10:15 PM (02:10:05) Vote on the motion: motion fails 6-1
08:10:32 PM (02:10:22) Board member Egge requested that units of residential development could be added to
the fairgrounds.
08:11:34 PM (02:11:24) Board member Pape commented that a project such as that would be a major
undertaking.
08:11:58 PM (02:11:48) Mayor Mehl suggested that the board could offer Steve White Mandeville Farms for
fairgrounds as it would allow a permanent place for county fairs and other events while allowing for the current
fairgrounds to be developed.
08:14:53 PM (02:14:43) Board member Thompson asked if there was a way to write language into the growth
policy to indicate the fairgrounds as a possible piece of future land use.
11
08:15:20 PM (02:15:10) Mayor Mehl mentioned that conceptually it is a possibility, but requested some time
before it was actually added as future land use.
08:15:53 PM (02:15:43) Motion: To re-visit the suggestion at a later date: Mark Egge
08:15:56 PM (02:15:46) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
08:16:27 PM (02:16:17) Vote on the motion: motion carries unanimously.
F. Discussion (Non-Action Item)
G. 08:16:46 PM (02:16:36) FYI/Discussion
08:16:49 PM (02:16:39) Mayor Mehl gave an update on the planning coordinating committee
08:17:26 PM (02:17:16) Chairman Happel inquired if the board wanted to schedule a meeting for January 28th.
08:18:22 PM (02:18:12) Board member Waterton commented that she would rather not hold an additional
meeting.
H. 08:18:48 PM (02:18:38) Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at TRogers@bozeman.net
This board generally meets the first and third Tuesday of the month at 7:00pm
Committee meetings are open to all members of the public. If you have a disability and require assistance, please contact our ADA
coordinator, Mike Gray at 582-3232 (TDD 582-2301).
12
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 1 of 7
THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
Monday, April 5th, 2021
00:00:00 WebEx Meeting Information
A) 00:03:14 Call Meeting to Order
Present: Henry Happel, Cathy Costakis, Richard Rudnicki, Gerald Pape, Mark Egge, George Thompson,
Matthew Hausauer, Jennifer Madgic
B) Disclosures
C) 00:04:42 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:05:55 Approval of Minutes
D.1 Minutes Approval for 11-16-20 and 03-15-21
11-16-20 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
03-15-21 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
00:06:23 Motion D) Approval of Minutes
Mark Egge: Motion
Gerald Pape: 2nd
00:06:32 Vote on the Motion to approve D) Approval of Minutes. The Motion carried 8 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Cathy Costakis
Richard Rudnicki
Gerald Pape
Mark Egge
George Thompson
Matthew Hausauer
13
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 2 of 7
Jennifer Madgic
Disapprove:
None
E) 00:06:42 Public Comment
G) 00:10:29 Action Items
G.1 00:10:39 Third work session to define and refine Planning Board goals for 2020
and implementation of the Bozeman Community Plan 2021. The initial discussion took
place on December 21, 2020 and the second work session took place on March 1, 2021.
Memo to PB-210330.pdf
Planning board - development review.pdf
Chairman Happel postponed a discussion regarding community outreach as the memo is extensive and
he would like to give board members more time to go through the content.
Chairman Happel inquired to Commissioner Madgic about the pursuit of a joint planning board and
zoning commission meeting.
Chairman Happel caught board members up on the effort to get in touch with other board chair-persons
to discuss ongoing matters that involve several different boards.
00:15:42 Board Member Presentation
Chairman Happel informed board members that a memo has been produced regarding the meeting that
commissioner Madgic and board member Rudnicki had with City staff.
Board member Rudnicki updated board members on the meeting that himself and Commissioner
Madgic had with City Staff, where he outlined the memo that was created in summary of that meeting.
00:28:07 Board Discussion
Chairman Happel asked board members to discuss the three ideas that they did not think were good
ideas.
Board member Pape proposed that the board should re-propose the idea to the city, requesting a one
page memo be sent by the applicant to the board for review.
Board member Hausauer commented that as an applicant, he would prefer to have a small, informal
meeting with a sub-committee to make sure the applicant is on the right track.
City Planner Rogers commented that the system of review is very different for projects that would go to
the planning board versus the park board because public notice and transparency is required. Asking to
see plans before they are brought to the board, would create an additional step in the application
process for builders.
14
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 3 of 7
Commissioner Madgic commented that she felt that early stage meetings with staff were helpful during
her time working in planning.
Board member Rudnicki commented that early stage meetings are usually well received and he has seen
this process be beneficial in several different places.
Board member Costakis commented that it could be beneficial to create a sub-committee combined of
several different boards to meet with applicants during the pre-application stage.
Board member Pape re-visited his idea of having applicants send the board a single page memo with a
brief snapshot of what the project is and if there should be preliminary changes made prior to the
application going to the board.
City Planner Rogers informed board members about A1 forms and showed them an example from a
previous project.
Board member Egge commented that he is slightly skeptical of this idea because he doesn't believe that
applicants are going to volunteer to be reviewed in the pre-application stage.
Chairman Happel requested that board members be sent copies of all A1's that come in to the City.
Board member Thompson commented that he liked the idea of getting more education of the planning
process from the City before deciding on creating a sub-committee for pre-application review.
Chairman Happel inquired to each board member as to their opinion on getting further education from
Community Development.
Board member Pape commented that it would be nice to get a summary from staff at the beginning of
meetings as to how much is coming down the pipe towards the board.
01:11:37 Key Ordinance Amendments Memo
Chairman Happel introduced the memo and asked board members to comment
01:14:00 Board discussion
Board member Rudnicki commented that without changes to the development code, the board is not
going to get the growth policy changes that they want and there is going to have to be a
recommendation to the commission.
Commissioner Madgic commented that she believes it is appropriate for the board to make
recommendations to the commission.
Board member Pape commented that the board has to be able to test policies and processes that are
put in place so that they are able to know if they work properly.
Chairman Happel commented that it is a good idea to compile a list and make a recommendation to the
commission of changes that should be made to get standards into compliance.
15
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 4 of 7
Board member Costakis commented that she feels that hiring a consultant to audit the UDC would be
helpful.
Board member Egge commented that he agrees with board member Costakis that it is a good idea to
perform a review and re-write of the UDC.
Chairman Happel replied to Egge's comment that the City has decided that it wants to first review the
UDC in the lens of how it effects AH, and that there is an audit currently being performed by a consulting
firm with that lens, in addition the auditor has been asked to do a re-write of the PUD section of the
UDC.
City Planner Saunders commented that Chairman Happel is mostly right, staff has made a request to the
City Manager, but there has not been an answer. Also, the legislative session is going to make some
major changes and the city is going to have to wait to see the "final package" that comes through when
the session is over.
Board member Thompson commented that he appreciated the idea of taking a strategic look at the UDC
and the challenge is going to be figuring out the major ideas that need to be addressed so they don't
take up too much time.
Board member Rudnicki commented that the idea is not to conduct a complete review of the UDC, but
that they need to pick the low hanging fruit quickly to get those few items revised in a shorter timeline.
Commissioner Madgic requested that board members add to or offer suggestions for the bulleted items.
Chairman Happel commented that a joint meeting is going to take place April 26th regarding that.
01:33:12 Motion The Planning Board consider key ordinance amendments for proposition to the city
commission for consideration, the action for that would be that each member review the attached list in
the memo prior to the next meeting and provide any additional items that they might like to see
included for discussion at that time.
Richard Rudnicki: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
01:33:21 Vote on the Motion to approve The Planning Board consider key ordinance amendments for
proposition to the city commission for consideration, the action for that would be that each member review
the attached list in the memo prior to the next meeting and provide any additional items that they might
like to see included for discussion at that time. The Motion carried 8 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Cathy Costakis
Richard Rudnicki
Gerald Pape
Mark Egge
George Thompson
16
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 5 of 7
Matthew Hausauer
Jennifer Madgic
Disapprove:
None
01:33:34 Report on information flow for development
Board member Rudnicki commented that the board is too far into the weeds for this.
Chairman Happel echoed board member Rudnicki's comment
Board member Hausauer inquired about some technical details in the staff report.
Staff liaison Rogers commented that they try to standardize the documents that they present and
suggested that the details are sometimes supporting ones.
Planner Saunders commented that it is written in the code and for the short term, they have to adhere
to the code as written.
Board member Costakis commented that the board should look at bigger picture things and that staff
should not have to do extra work to make changes.
Board member Rudnicki commented that each board has different purviews, so they should not all be
relayed the same exact information, they should be catered to what the board is tasked to review.
Board member Pape commented that he would like to see the board have access to more information.
01:49:24 Motion That the board explore the possibility of some simplified avenue by which potential
applicants can communicate to the board what they see their benefits to the community in a given
project as being.
Gerald Pape: Motion
Jennifer Madgic: 2nd
01:49:17 Board member Pape amended his motion to provide clarity that the applicants would
communicate early in the process.
Board member Thompson commented that he sees this motion as a narrative summary.
Board member Rudnicki outlined issues he had with the motion, stating that it is phrased vaguely and
open ended and it should be stated more specifically.
Commissioner Madgic spoke to her second of the motion.
Board member Costakis agreed with Commissioner Madgic's comment.
Chairman Happel commented that he is going to support board member Pape's motion.
17
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 6 of 7
02:00:18 Vote on the Motion to approve That the board explore the possibility of some simplified avenue
by which potential applicants can communicate to the board what they see their benefits to the community
in a given project as being. The Motion carried 8 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Cathy Costakis
Richard Rudnicki
Gerald Pape
Mark Egge
George Thompson
Matthew Hausauer
Jennifer Madgic
Disapprove:
None
H) 02:00:53 FYI/Discussion
Staff liaison Rogers informed the board of the upcoming Zoning Commission meeting.
Commissioner Madgic commented that there is still 1 seat vacant on the board.
I) 02:09:21 Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at trogers@bozeman.net. This board generally meets
the 2nd and 4th Monday of each month from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
18
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-05-21
Page 7 of 7
19
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Martin Matsen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:South University District Phase 3 Amended Plat and Subdivision Variance to
Revise Conditions of Approval for Application 19090 a 10 Lot Major
Subdivision Located Southeast of the Intersection of Kagy Boulevard and S.
19th Avenue Relating to Installation of Infrastructure and On-Site
Construction, Application 21066
MEETING DATE:April 19, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Quasi-Judicial
RECOMMENDATION:
Planning Board Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the
application materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I
hereby adopt the findings presented in the staff report for application 21066
and move to recommend approval of the subdivision with conditions and
subject to all applicable code provisions.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:This application is to modify conditions of approval and phasing of the
development from the original application of a subdivision (19090) for which
the Findings of Fact were approved on December 15, 2020. The applicant,
RTR Holdings II, LLC proposes to divide the existing 74.87-acre Lot 2 of the
South University District, Phase 2 Minor Subdivision into ten lots and rights
of way. A subdivision variance is also requested relating to the timing of
installation of infrastructure and ability to draw a building permit. See the
attached staff report for more information. The findings of fact for the initial
approval as Application 19090 are attached for reference.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:1. Recommend approval of the application with the recommended
conditions;
2. Recommend approval the application with modifications to the
recommended conditions;
20
3. Recommend denial of the application based on the Board’s 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 or the applicant to supply additional information or to
address specific items.
FISCAL EFFECTS:See staff report.
Attachments:
21066 PB Staff Report - Final.docx
19- Findings of Fact and Order - South University District
Phase 3 Major Subdivision, Application 19090.pdf
Application Packet for Agendas.pdf
Report compiled on: April 7, 2021
21
Page 1 of 21
21066, City Commission Staff Report for the South University District Amended Phase 3
Subdivision and Variance
Public Hearing Date:Planning Board, April 19, 2021 at 6:00 pm. Via WebEx.
City Commission, April 20, 2021 at 6:00pm. Via WebEx.
Project Description: The amended subdivision is a ten lot major subdivision preliminary plat of
a 74.87-acre lot to create one lot for commercial development, three restricted
development lots, four open space lots, two city park lots and dedicated rights-of-way
within the boundaries of the South University District Master Plan. The amendment
requests to revise existing conditions of approval and code requirements and includes a
subdivision variance to 38.270, Improvements and Guarantees, Bozeman Municipal
Code. The purpose of the amendment and variance is to enable phased construction of
infrastructure and flexible timing of on-site construction within the subdivision. The
subject property is zoned REMU, Residential Emphasis Mixed Use.
Project Location:The subject parcel is located southeast of the Intersection of Kagy Blvd. and
S. 19th Avenue. It is legally described as Lot 2, Phase 2, South University District
Subdivision, situated in the Northwest One-Quarter (NW ¼), Section 24, Township Two
South (T2S), Range Five East (R5E), P.M.M., Gallatin County, Montana.
Recommendation: Approval with conditions and code requirements
Planning Board Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 21066 and move to recommend approval of
the subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions.
City Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 21066 and move to approve the subdivision
variance to Article 38.270 with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions.
City Commission Recommended Motion: Having reviewed and considered the application
materials, public comment, and all the information presented, I hereby adopt the findings
presented in the staff report for application 21066 and move to approve the subdivision
with conditions and subject to all applicable code provisions.
Report Date: April 13, 2021
Staff Contact:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Karl Johnson, Engineer
Agenda Item Type: Action (Quasi-judicial)
22
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 2 of 21
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Unresolved Issues
None.
Project Summary
This application is to modify conditions of approval and phasing of the development from the
original application of a subdivision (19090) for which the Findings of Fact were approved on
December 15, 2020. The applicant, RTR Holdings II, LLC proposes to divide the existing 74.87-
acre Lot 2 of the South University District, Phase 2 Minor Subdivision into ten lots and rights of
way. A subdivision variance is also requested relating to the timing of installation of
infrastructure and ability to draw a building permit.
The intent is to plat all lots with development restrictions to enable transfer of lots to fund
installation of the infrastructure to support the development. The four blocks which will be
created are all large in size and will require additional development review before being able to
begin construction. Phasing of infrastructure is an essential element of this application.
The City of Bozeman Department of Community Development received a preliminary plat
application on February 16, 2021, requesting a modification to the major subdivision as it was
initially approved by City Commission. The application was deemed adequate on March 17, 2021
and review continued. The final decision for a Major Subdivision must be made within 60 working
days of the date it was deemed adequate, or in this case, by June 9, 2021.
The City Commission unanimously approved the initial preliminary plat on October 21, 2019.
Alternatives
1. Recommend approval of the application with the recommended conditions;
2. Recommend approval the application with modifications to the recommended conditions;
3. Recommend denial of the application based on the Board’s 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 or the
applicant to supply additional information or to address specific items.
23
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 3 of 21
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 2
Unresolved Issues............................................................................................................... 2
Project Summary................................................................................................................. 2
Alternatives......................................................................................................................... 2
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES.......................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL............................................ 7
SECTION 3 – REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS.................................................................... 11
SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS ....................................... 11
SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ............................................................... 11
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.130, BMC............................... 11
Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608 ................................................. 13
Preliminary Plat Supplements........................................................................................... 15
Subdivision Variance........................................................................................................ 16
APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY................................... 19
APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT ....................................................... 21
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION .............................................................................. 21
FISCAL EFFECTS...................................................................................................................... 21
ATTACHMENTS........................................................................................................................ 21
24
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 4 of 21
SECTION 1 - MAP SERIES
Zoning Map of Subject Property
25
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 5 of 21
Map of Future Land Use
26
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 6 of 21
Approved South University District Master Site Plan
27
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 7 of 21
Plat of overall development
SECTION 2 - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Please note that these conditions are in addition to any required code provisions identified in this
report. This application proposes phases. Unless a condition is specific to an individual phase, all
comments and code requirements apply to any final plat of all phases.
This amended preliminary plat is to modify conditions of approval and phasing. Only those
conditions which are the specific focus of the review are changing. Unless specifically listed
below the conditions of approval remain as adopted in the findings of fact for application 19090.
Code requirements adjust as needed to match with the amended preliminary plat and supporting
materials.
28
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 8 of 21
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1.Conditions not specifically modified with this application remain as approved in
the findings of fact for application 19090.
2.The approved Master Site Plan is still in effect and all standards for future
development, e.g. additional street installation apply with future development.
3.A 1 foot no access strip must be placed along all lots fronting on South 19th Street.
4.A 1 foot no access strip must be placed along all lots fronting on West Kagy
Boulevard.
5.The final plat must contain the following notation on the Conditions of Approval
sheet in the final plat:
a. All downstream irrigation water user facilities must be protected.
b. Lot access must be constructed to the standard set forth by the City of
Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy, and the City of
Bozeman Modifications to the State Public Works Standard Specifications per
Bozeman Municipal Code requirements.
6.Several signature blocks on the first page of the plat note "Irrigation
Improvements", but the listed improvements are something else. The signature
blocks of the plat sheet must have proper notations for respective improvements.
7.The applicant must dedicate all required public easements, and the easements
must be provided on the City’s standard template easement documents separate
from the plat prior to final plat approval. The recorded document number must be
listed on the final plat.
8.If the City Commission approves the variance to 38.270 BMC the following
conditions are included with the approval; if the variance is NOT approved
they are removed from the subdivision and will not be included in the
findings of fact:
a. The applicant must provide a financial guarantee in a form suitable to the City
Attorney and in an amount equal to 150% of the estimated improvements cost
prior to final plat approval for the Common Improvements as shown on the
phasing plan. The estimated improvements cost must be based on City bid
unit price construction costs and reviewed and approved by the City
Engineering Division prior to submitting the financial guarantee.
b. The final plat must be subject to an improvements agreement acceptable to the
City Attorney addressing the phasing and timing of infrastructure installation,
restricting construction unless adequate security has been provided, and
29
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 9 of 21
providing for transfer of infrastructure obligations and revised security to
subsequent landowners.
c. The bullet lists of infrastructure improvements must be consistent throughout
the document titled, “South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision
Phasing Plan to Facilitate Written Concomitant Construction Approval”. The
applicant must be clear about what improvements are included in each major
infrastructure element. Under the Block 3 and Block 4 “Miscellaneous”
headings in the document titled, “South University District Phase 3 Major
Subdivision Phasing Plan to Facilitate Written Concomitant Construction
Approval” the word “likely” must be removed.
d. The Certificate of Completion of Improvements, as written, notes the Public
Works Department is accepting infrastructure improvements, but the
infrastructure will only have been financially guaranteed. The note on the
final plat must reflect infrastructure financially guaranteed and elements of
infrastructure not in place at the time of final plat. Public infrastructure must
be installed per the phasing plan or guaranteed prior to final plat approval.
The phasing plan must be referenced on the plat or included in a separate
document filed with the County Clerk and Recorder to be filed simultaneously
with the final plat.
e. Condition 3 of application 19090 (notice of restrictions due to uninstalled
infrastructure) is revised to read “In accordance with Section 38.270.030
BMC, all lots without all required infrastructure installed must be subject to
the following note to be placed on the Conditions of Approval sheet of the
final plat – ‘NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to all potential purchasers of Lot
1 Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South
University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana, that the final plat of the subdivision was approved by the
Bozeman City Commission without completion of certain on and off site
improvements required under the Bozeman Municipal Code, as is allowed in
Chapter 38.39 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal code. As such, this
Restriction is filed with the final plat that stipulates that any use of these lots
is subject to further subdivision or plan review, and no certificate of
occupancy development of this these lots shall occur be granted until all on
and off site improvements are completed as required under the Bozeman
Municipal Code. THEREFORE, BE ADVISED, that Building Permits
Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for Lot 1 Block 1, Lot 1 Block
2, Lot1 Bock 3, and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District Phase 3
Major Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana until all
required on and off site improvements for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision
30
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 10 of 21
are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman in accordance with the
accepted Phasing Improvements Plan for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision.
No building structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized
granted a certificate of occupancy on this these lots until the restriction is
lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further
subdivision, plan review, or the written consent of the City of Bozeman.’”
f. Condition 8 of application 19090 (installation of subdivision improvements)
is revised to read: “The subdivision improvements shown on the subdivision
improvements plan, sheets, C1.0, C1.1, C4.1, and C42 must be installed prior
to final plat approval or guaranteed and installed within 1 year of final plat
approval per BMC 38.270.030.B. or as allowed by the subdivision variance.”
9.If the City Commission does NOT approve the variance to 38.270 BMC the
following conditions are included with the decision; if the variance is
approved they are removed from the subdivision and will not be included in
the findings of fact:
a.Condition 3 of application 19090 (notice of restrictions due to uninstalled
infrastructure) is revised to read “In accordance with Section 38.270.030
BMC, all lots without all required infrastructure installed must be subject to
the following note to be placed on the Conditions of Approval sheet of the
final plat – ‘NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to all potential purchasers of Lot 1
Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South
University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin
County, Montana, that the final plat of the subdivision was approved by the
Bozeman City Commission without completion of certain on and off site
improvements required under the Bozeman Municipal Code, as is allowed in
Chapter 38.39 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal code. As such, this
Restriction is filed with the final plat that stipulates that any use of these lots
is subject to further subdivision or plan review, and no development of this
these lots shall occur until all on and off site improvements are completed as
required under the Bozeman Municipal Code. THEREFORE, BE ADVISED,
that Building Permits will not be issued for Lot 1 Block 1, Lot 1 Block 2, Lot
1 Bock 3, and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District Phase 3 Major
Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana until all required on
and off site improvements for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision are completed
and accepted by the City of Bozeman in accordance with the accepted Phasing
Improvements Plan for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision. No building
structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on this these lots
until the restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with the land and is
revocable only by further subdivision, plan review, or the written consent of
the City of Bozeman.
b. The Certificate of Completion of Improvements, as written, notes the Public
Works Department is accepting infrastructure improvements, but the
31
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 11 of 21
infrastructure may only have been guaranteed. The note on the final plat must
reflect infrastructure guaranteed and elements of infrastructure not in place at
the time of final plat.
SECTION 3 – REQUIRED CODE PROVISIONS
1. Code provisions remain as identified in the findings of fact for application 19090 except
as needed to address revised conditions and the subdivision variance.
2. Code correction 13 of application 19090 (phasing) is modified to correspond to the
revised phasing plan and updated plan sheets C1.0 and C1.1.
SECTION 4 - RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE ACTIONS
The DRC determined that the application was adequate for continued review on March 17, 2021.
The Planning Board will conduct a public hearing to review the preliminary plat and make a
recommendation to the City Commission. The public hearing date for the Planning Board is on
April 19, 2021 at 6:00pm via WebEx.
The public hearing date for the City Commission is on April 20, 2021 at 6:00pm via WebEx.
SECTION 5 - STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
Analysis and resulting recommendations are based on the entirety of the application materials,
municipal codes, standards, and plans, public comment, and all other materials available during
the review period. Collectively this information is the record of the review. The analysis is a
summary of the completed review.
Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 38.240.130, BMC.
In considering applications for subdivision approval under this title, the advisory boards and City
Commission shall consider the following:
1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act
The preliminary plat has been prepared in accordance with the survey requirements of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of Montana. As
noted in recommended condition of approval number 2 of the original findings of fact for 19090,
the final plat must comply with State statute, Administrative Rules of Montana, and the Bozeman
Municipal Code.
2) Compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5 of the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act
The final plat must comply with the standards identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal
Code (BMC). The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions, or code provisions that are not
32
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 12 of 21
specifically listed as a condition of approval, does not, in any way, create a waiver or other
relaxation of the lawful requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code or State law. Sections 2 and
3 of this report and the findings of fact for application 19090 identify conditions and code
requirements necessary to meet all regulatory standards for the subdivision. Therefore, upon
satisfaction of all conditions and code corrections the subdivision will comply with the local
subdivision regulations.
3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act
The City of Bozeman Department of Community Development received a preliminary plat
application on February 16, 2021, requesting a modification to the major subdivision as it was
approved by City Commission on December 12, 2019. The application was deemed adequate for
review on March 17, 2021 and review continued. The final decision for a Major Subdivision must
be made within 60 working days of the date it was deemed adequate, or in this case, by June 9,
2021. The City Commission is scheduled to review the preliminary plat and make a decision at
their April 20, 2021 public hearing.
The hearings before the Planning Board and City Commission have been properly noticed as
required by the Bozeman Municipal Code. Based on the recommendation of the DRC and other
applicable review agencies, as well as any public testimony received on the matter, the Planning
Board shall forward a recommendation to the City Commission, whichwill make the final decision
on the applicant’s request.
Public notice for this application was given as described in Appendix B.
On April 13th, this major subdivision staff report was completed and forwarded with a
recommendation of conditional approval for consideration by the Planning Board.
4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations
Based on review of the DRC and the Department of Community Development all applicable
regulations appear to be met if all code requirements and conditions are satisfied. Pertinent code
provisions and site specific requirements are included in Sections 2 and 3 of the findings of fact
for application 19090 and this report. Analysis for compliance with the required subdivision
variance standards is below in this section.
5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and installation
of any necessary utilities
All easements, existing and proposed, must be accurately depicted and addressed on the final plat
and in the final plat application. Therefore, all utilities and necessary utility easements will be
provided and depicted accordingly on the final plat. All city utilities will be located within
dedicated street rights of way or are required by condition to be located within easements. See
Condition 7.
33
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 13 of 21
6) The provision of legal and physical access to each parcel within the subdivision and the
notation of that access on the applicable plat and any instrument transferring the parcel
All of the proposed lots have frontage to proposed public streets required to be constructed to City
standards per BMC 38.400 and associated design standards. In addition, pursuant to BMC
38.400.090.A, plats must contain a statement requiring lot accesses to be built to the standard
contained in this section, the city design standards and specifications policy, and the City
modifications to state public works standard specifications. See Condition 5.
The larger blocks are of a size suitable for further subdivision. Should that occur, further analysis
for location of additional local streets will be conducted to ensure legal and physical access are
provided. The City controls access to collectors and arterial streets to limit vehicle conflicts, and
improve traffic efficiency. Conditions are included to require a no access strip along Kagy Blvd
and S. 19th Avenue to accomplish these purposes.
Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608
1) The effect on agriculture
This amended subdivision will not impact agriculture on the site. The subject property is
designated as residential mixed use according to the City of Bozeman Community Plan. The
area is zoned for residential and commercial uses, has been annexed and previously subdivided
for urban uses, but is presently undeveloped. The amendment does not change the allowed
intensity or nature of the approved uses. The requested variance addresses coordination between
infrastructure installation and timing for construction of buildings. No viable farm units exist on
the property. The subdivision will not have adverse effects on agriculture.
2) The effect on Agricultural water user facilities
This subdivision will not impact agricultural water user facilities. There are no known active
agricultural water use facilities located within the subdivision. The area is zoned for residential
emphasis mixed use and has been under the process of development for many years. Mandeville
Creek, which crosses the property north to south is located within the previously approved park
and should be minimally impacted. The subdivision variance does not alter the scope of impacts.
Condition 5 requires that downstream irrigators be protected should an impacted party be
identified.
3) The effect on Local services
Water/Sewer – Municipal water and sewer mains exist in the adjacent street rights of way to
serve the development. Capacity for further development per the approved master site plan for
the project is available. Installation of water and sewer will be phased in conjunction with the
street improvements. No changes to conditions of approval relating uniquely to water and sewer
are proposed. The subdivision variance will alter when the improvements are installed. However,
coordination between phases can be appropriately addressed with infrastructure design.
Installation of water and sewer will be coordinated with installation of overlying streets.
34
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 14 of 21
Streets – The Growth Policy and subdivision standards require adequate connectivity of the
street grid to ensure sufficient infrastructure to serve the needs of the public and alleviate
congestion. The preliminary plat layout provides the missing link in Stucky Road to connect S.
19th and S. 11th Avenues. This will provide an essential connection in support both of this
development and the future rebuild of Kagy Blvd.
Phasing of street construction is an essential element of this amended preliminary plat. The
applicant proposes to divide street construction into Common Infrastructure – S. 19
th Avenue and
Stucky Road improvements, and then the local street frontage to individual blocks. The current
standard in the municipal code is for all streets to be constructed or for building permits to be
restricted with the final plat. This code provision was created when the majority of subdivision
development was for individual residential lots not subject to further site plan or subdivision
review. It was necessary to have the streets constructed up front due to the difficulties in
coordinating many contractors finishing small segments of streets and the disconnected and
nonfunctional street that would result. If the variance is approved, the code and conditions of
approval assure and secure street completion through a combination of an improvements
agreement with suitable security and a restriction on the ability to construct or occupy on the
created lots until the street is complete.
In this application, the four blocks being created are very large and not suitable for development
without further subdivision or site plan review. The variance request seeks approval for the
building restriction to be applied to occupancy rather than initial construction. The City will have
the ability to review and ensure adequate construction through the improvement agreement and
security which will be in place. In addition, the City will have the opportunity to review any
further subdivision or site plan proposal and place further conditions at that time to manage
construction of the street. The City has the authority to limit the scope of what may be
constructed on an individual lot prior to completion of infrastructure during subsequent review of
development on individual blocks.
Police/Fire – The area of the subdivision is within the service area of both these departments. No
concerns on service availability have been identified. The necessary addresses will be provided
to enable 911 response in conjunction with future further subdivision and site plan review.
Stormwater - The subdivision will construct storm water control facilities to conform to
municipal code. Inspection of installed facilities prior to final plat will verify that standards have
been met. Maintenance of the storm water facilities is an obligation of the property owners’
association. Each phase is obligated to install the stormwater controls relevant to that phase.
Therefore, adequate stormwater treatment should be provided.
Parklands - The original subdivision proposal meets the required park dedication and
improvement standards. The Recreation and Parks Advisory Board recommended approval of
the park master plan with earlier review. A final park plan will be completed and approved with
the initial final plat. This issue was previously reviewed with application 19090 and the
35
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 15 of 21
necessary conditions or code requirements identified. Review for individual blocks will be
conducted as they develop.
The proposed phasing divides responsibility for installation of park improvements among the
individual blocks. The division lines appear proportionate and workable. Each portion is of a
sufficient size to meet anticipated needs for the assigned block.
4) The effect on the Natural environment
A watercourse, Mandeville Creek, crosses the site from south to north. The creek is located
within the previously approved park. Two crossings for Stucky Road and Arnold Street were
previously approved. This issue was previously reviewed with application 19090 and the
necessary conditions or code requirements identified. No differences have been identified with
this amendment and variance.
5) The effect on Wildlife and wildlife habitat
The subdivision will not significantly impact wildlife and wildlife habitat. The site has been
substantially impacted by small grain production and prior development activity which has
reduced wildlife habitat. There are no known endangered or threatened species on the property.
6) The effect on Public health and safety
The intent of the regulations in Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is to protect the
public health, safety and general welfare. The subdivision has been reviewed by the DRC which
has determined that it is in general compliance with Chapter 38. Conditions deemed necessary to
ensure compliance are noted throughout this staff report. All subdivisions must be reviewed
against the criteria listed in 76-3-608.3.b-d, Mont Code Annotated. The provision of municipal
infrastructure and transportation is one of the key ways in which the public health and safety is
protected. See the discussion under criterion 3 above.
The Department of Community Development has reviewed this application against the listed
criteria and provides the following summary for submittal materials and requirements.
Preliminary Plat Supplements
A subdivision pre-application plan review for the initial preliminary plat, application 19090, was
completed by the DRC on October 31, 2017. With the pre-application plan review application,
waivers were requested from the materials required in Section 38.220.060 “Additional
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements.” Some items were not waived and all required
material were addressed.
38.220.060.A.1 through 38.220.060.A.20
There are no differences for these supplements from the initial review conducted under
application 19090. Therefore, that analysis stands as documented in the findings of fact.
36
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 16 of 21
Subdivision Variance
Article 38.270 establishes standards and procedures for installation of infrastructure required
with subdivisions and other development. The purpose of the Article is to meet state law
requirements, protect the public safety by ensuring needed water, sewer, transportation, parks,
etc. are prepared to support new development, and protect future purchasers and site users. See
the purpose and applicability section of the Article for more information. The Article as it applies
to this application has not been materially revised since 2004.
The applicant requests a variance from the provision, included in several locations in the article,
which restricts issuance of a building permit on a platted lot until all required infrastructure is
installed. The applicant has provided a proposed phasing plan for how infrastructure will be
assigned to individual elements of the subdivision and coordinated timing of construction and
site development.
A common set of improvements which supports all blocks, including expansion of S. 19th
Avenue and the extension of Stucky Road, is proposed to be constructed immediately. The
applicant has approved infrastructure plans for these improvements and is assembling bids to
begin the construction this spring. Other elements, as shown in the phasing plan are assigned to
each block. The elements of infrastructure to be installed are not lessened but are changed in
timing. The construction of infrastructure assigned to each block will be installed in conjunction
with the later approved development on each block. Given the size of Blocks 1-4 any future
development will be subject to additional subdivision or site plan review. That additional review
process provides additional opportunities to be assured the infrastructure will be installed.
In order to ensure that the required infrastructure will be installed conditions of approval for this
amended preliminary plat have been developed. An improvements agreement addressing the
phasing, division by blocks of infrastructure elements, and transferring responsibilities as
ownerships shift will be required with the final plat. Staff finds the provisions of the
improvement agreement and conditions of approval adequate to protect the public health, safety
and welfare; protect future purchasers and site users; and avoid injury to the public interest.
State law, 76-3-506, MCA, authorizes variances when “…strict compliance will result in undue
hardship and when it is not essential to the public welfare.” Variances can be granted based on
specific variance criteria included in the subdivision regulations. The City may apply conditions
to “secure the objectives of this chapter” [Chapter 38]. The City has adopted the following
criteria as part of 38.250.080, BMC.
37
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 17 of 21
Variance Review Criteria
1. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or
general welfare, or be injurious to other adjoining properties;
Criteria is met. The application does not provide less infrastructure or of a lesser quality. It does
change timing. The installation of the infrastructure will be coordinated with site development
dependent on the infrastructure so concurrency is maintained and services can be provided to
those who most rely on it. The City has provisions included in 38.270 for similar circumstances
but of less expansiveness of work. The applicant proposes the variance to effectively extend the
scope. The initial installation of the Common Improvements will establish essential connections
that serve the general public and the individual blocks for future development.
The deferred installation of infrastructure does not jeopardize extensions to other properties
dependent on it. The Common Improvements as described in the phasing plan provides for the
needed infrastructure in support of the development overall and provides the greatest community
benefit by expanding S. 19th Avenue and creating the final link in Stucky Road to 11th Avenue
which will facilitate later expansion of Kagy Blvd, construction traffic for individual blocks, and
improved pedestrian access to MSU. Needed infrastructure adjacent to each proposed block will
be installed at time of development for that block. Therefore, the variance is not contrary to the
criteria.
2. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of
the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if strict
interpretation of this chapter is enforced;
Criteria is met. The shape of the subdivision is unusual due to the previous phases developed
from the initial tract of record. The subdivision is unusual in that it does not propose creation of
any parcels for immediate use. As described in the introduction to the variance criteria, this
subdivision is only creating parcels which will require additional subdivision or site review
before any construction can be approved. This is quite different from the circumstances for the
majority of subdivisions at the time the standard was initially adopted into the municipal code.
Unlike some subdivisions all of the proposed parcels already have legal and physical access from
existing streets (S. 19th and S. 11th Avenues). There are no unusual topographical conditions for
this property.
The elements of infrastructure to be installed are not lessened but are changed in timing. The
construction of infrastructure assigned to each block will be that expected to be in conjunction
with the later approved development on each block. Given the size of Blocks 1-4 any future
development will be subject to additional subdivision or site plan review. That additional review
38
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 18 of 21
process provides additional opportunities to be assured the infrastructure will be installed. The
municipal code allows for concurrent construction of adjacent infrastructure and on-site
improvements. The variance is essentially creating a situation where this approach can be applied
on newly platted lots. The applicant asserts that applying the code literally for this situation
produces a hardship when there are alternate means to address the public purposes of the code.
The applicant’s cited hardship is both financial due to the cost of a financial surety for the work
and the time restriction required due to the scope of improvements limiting work on lots when
there is an opportunity to coordinate onsite and infrastructure construction.
In order to ensure that the required infrastructure will be installed conditions of approval for this
amended preliminary plat have been developed. An improvements agreement addressing the
phasing, division by blocks of infrastructure elements, and transferring responsibilities as
ownerships shift will be required with the final plat. Staff finds the provisions of the
improvement agreement and conditions of approval adequate to protect the public health, safety
and welfare; protect future purchasers and site users; and avoid injury to the public interest. As
the public interests and future purchasers are protected through alternate means, a strict
application is unnecessarily burdensome.
3. The variance will not cause a substantial increase in public costs; and
Criteria is met. The proposed variance is related to procedural requirements of Article 38.270,
Improvements and guarantees. There are no changes in the infrastructure itself. The applicant
and subdivision is not relieved of the obligation to construct the required elements of
infrastructure. Condition 8.a requires that the valuation of the required financial guarantee for the
Common Improvements be equal to the costs the City is liable to incur should the applicant
default on the improvements agreement. The City will require a new improvements agreement
with appropriate surety for each block as it moves to future review and construction. This will
ensure there is always needed funding available to complete any outstanding infrastructure to
support proposed development on a specific site. Therefore, there should be no increase in public
costs.
4. The variance will not, in any manner, place the subdivision in nonconformance with any
other provisions of this chapter or with the city's growth policy.
Criteria is met. Article 38.270 is the portion of the chapter that address the installation of
improvements. Therefore, the variance should not create non-conformities with other parts of
Chapter 38. No conflicts with the growth policy have been identified.
39
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 19 of 21
APPENDIX A –PROJECT SITE ZONING AND GROWTH POLICY
Zoning Designation and Land Uses: The subject property is zoned REMU (Residential
Emphasis Mixed Use).
The intent of the Residential Emphasis Mixed Use district is:
Residential emphasis mixed-use zoning district (REMU).The intent and purpose of the
REMU district is to establish areas within Bozeman that are mixed-use in character and
to provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail and neighborhood
service opportunities within a new or existing neighborhood. These purposes are
accomplished by:
1.Emphasizing residential as the primary use, including single household dwellings,
two to four household dwellings, townhouses, and apartments.
2.Providing for a diverse array of neighborhood-scaled commercial and civic uses
supporting residential.
3.Emphasizing a vertical and horizontal mix of uses in a compact and walkable
neighborhood setting.
4.Promoting neighborhoods that:
a.Create self-sustaining neighborhoods that will lay the foundation for healthy
lifestyles;
b.Support compact, walkable developments that promote balanced
transportation options;
c.Have residential as the majority use with a range of densities;
d.Provide for a diverse array of commercial and civic uses supporting
residential;
e.Have residential and commercial uses mixed vertically and/or horizontally;
f.Locate commercial uses within walking distance;
g.Incorporate a wider range of housing types; and
h.Encourage developments that exhibit the physical design characteristics of
vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets.
5.Providing standards and guidelines that emphasize a sense of place:
a.Support or add to an existing neighborhood context;
b.Enhance an existing neighborhood's sense of place and strive to make it more
self-sustainable;
c.Encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a unique identity
and strong sense of place;
d.Develop commercial and mixed-use areas that are safe, comfortable, and
attractive to pedestrians; and
40
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 20 of 21
e.Reinforce the principle of streets as public places that encourage pedestrian
and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical elements of
complete streets.
6.Providing standards and guidelines that emphasize natural amenities:
a.Preserve and integrate the natural amenities into the development; and
b.Appropriately balance a hierarchy of both parks and public spaces that are
within the neighborhood.
7.Providing standards and guidelines that emphasize the development of centers:
a.Group uses of property to create vibrant centers;
b.Where appropriate create a center within an existing neighborhood;
c.Facilitate proven, market driven projects to ensure both long and short-term
financial viability;
d.Allow an appropriate blend of complementary mixed land uses including, but
not limited to, retail, offices, commercial services, restaurants, bars, hotels,
recreation and civic uses, and housing, to create economic and social vitality;
e.Foster the master plan development into a mix of feasible, market driven
uses;
f.Emphasize the need to serve the adjacent, local neighborhood and as well as
the greater Bozeman area; and
g.Maximize land use efficiency by encouraging shared use parking.
8.Promoting the integration of action:
a.Support existing infrastructure that is within and adjacent to REMU zones;
b.Encourage thoughtfully developed master planned communities;
c.Provide flexibility in the placement and design of new developments and
redevelopment to anticipate changes in the marketplace;
d.Provide flexibility in phasing to help ensure both long and short term
financial viability for the project as a whole;
9.Providing standards and guidelines that promote sustainable design
Use of this zone is appropriate for sites at least five acres in size and areas located
adjacent to an existing or planned residential area to help sustain commercial uses
within walking distance and a wider range of housing types.
Adopted Growth Policy Designation: The Future Land Use Map of the Bozeman Community
Plan designates the subject property to develop as “Residential Mixed Use” which is described
as:
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
41
21066 City Commission Staff Report – South University District Amended Ph. 3 Subdivision
Page 21 of 21
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.
APPENDIX B – NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT
Notice was provided at least 15 and not more than 45 days prior to the Planning Board and City
Commission public hearings. Per Article 38.220, Notice was provided by posting the site,
mailing by certified mail to adjacent property owners and by first class mail to all other owners
within 200 feet, and by legal advertisement publication in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle. Content
of the notice contained all elements required by Article 38.220, BMC. Due to a notice
distribution error by the applicant a new notice was published in the Bozeman Daily Chronicle
and necessary posting and mailing of notices was performed.
No public comment has been received as of the writing of this report.
APPENDIX C - OWNER INFORMATION
Owner/Applicant: RTR Holdings II, LLC 22 Turtle Rock Court, Tiburon CA 94920
Representative: Stahly Engineering & Associates, 851 Bridger Drive, Suite 1, Bozeman, MT
59715
Report by:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
FISCAL EFFECTS
The development will generate the typical costs and revenues of development.
ATTACHMENTS
The full application and file of record can be viewed at the Community Development
Department at 20 E. Olive Street, Bozeman, MT 59715.
Application materials – Available through the Laserfiche archive linked agenda materials
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
•
• www.seaeng.com Engineers and Land Surveyors
851 Bridger Drive, Suite 1, Bozeman, MT 59715 | phone: 406-522-8594 | fax: 406-522-9528
February 11, 2021
City of Bozeman
Bozeman Planning Department
Attn: Marty Matsen
PO Box 1230
20 East Olive
Bozeman, MT 59771-1230
RE: South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision 19090—Modification of Plat Conditions
and Variance
Dear Marty,
Thank you for organizing the meeting we had yesterday on South University District; it was very
helpful, and we appreciate your willingness to work with us. We are proposing two minor
modifications to two subdivision Conditions of Approval (#3, and #8) and one code correction (#13).
Additionally, we are proposing a variance from BMC 38.270.030 B.1.b.2 regarding the timing of
completion of improvements. The goal of these proposed modifications and variance is to allow
phased completion of subdivision improvements to more appropriate times. Please note that the
proposed modifications of the Conditions of Approval are applicable whether or not the variance is
approved, and the two items are not dependent on one another. Based on our conversation yesterday,
it is our understanding that a complete Preliminary Plat resubmittal and review is not required, but—
instead—only submittal of information supporting the discrete changes proposed is required.
Summary of Plat and Conditions of Approval Modifications
In response to, and in support of the proposed modifications to conditions, some minor modifications
to the Plat are necessary. These changes are clearly depicted on the revised Preliminary Plat included
with this application and can be summarized as changing Lot 1 Block 1 to a restricted lot and
dedication of rights-of-way of future streets. These revisions do not substantially change the
subdivision but support the proposed phasing of subdivision infrastructure. The revised Preliminary
Plat provided also reflects the proposed change to Condition of Approval #3 which is required to be
stated on the Plat. There are also non-impactful, minor revisions to the phasing of park
improvements to distribute park improvements more equitably.
In October 2020, Stahly submitted a proposed phasing plan for SUD Phase 3 which is included with
this submittal. The phasing plan identified road and utility connections for the four blocks as
restricted lots created with this plat. This plan identified subdivision improvements which are
required prior to the development of any of the four restricted lots, labeled as “Common Subdivision
Improvements” (shown in yellow). Furthermore, this plan identified three subsequent phases of
subdivision improvements that are required with the phased development of the restricted lots,
labeled as “Block # Off-Site Improvements” (other colors). These subsequent improvements phases
73
Page | 2
are not required for the platting of the restricted lots and are only necessary to support development of
each of the restricted lots.
Based on this phasing plan, the Common Subdivision Improvements will be financially guaranteed
with an improvements agreement with the SUD Phase 3 Final Plat. The subsequent phases of each
block’s off-site improvements will be non-financially guaranteed by development restrictions placed
on these lots. As proposed by the modified Condition of Approval #3, the development restrictions
can only be lifted by subsequent subdivision or plan review of proposed development on each of the
restricted lots. This review will enable the City to more accurately identify and review required off-
site improvements necessary to support development of each restricted lots. Also, this review will
ensure that each restricted lot’s required off-site improvements are constructed or financially
guaranteed at the appropriate time.
Since the phasing plan changes the required SUD Phase 3 subdivision improvements, execution of
the SUD Ph 3 Phasing Plan, impacts Conditions of Approval #8 and Code Correction #13, which
reference the original extent of the subdivision improvements. The wording of these conditions will
not change but the referenced plan sheets C 1.0 and C 1.1 have been updated to clearly show the new
extent of the SUD Phase 3 Common Subdivision Improvements. These exhibits correspond with
recently approved plans for these improvements. Essentially, original subdivision improvements to
South 17th Avenue and State Street have been moved to the Block 1 and 2 Off-site Improvement
phase, requiring Lot 1 to be changed to a restricted lot.
Summary of Proposed Variance
A variance from BMC 38.270.030 B.1.b.2 is proposed to change the required timing of subdivision
improvements from prior to Building Permit to prior to Certificate of Occupancy. If approved, this
variance would allow parallel and simultaneous construction of on and off-site improvements. Each
restricted lot development phase would have required off-site improvements that would be need to be
completed before occupancy of any structure on the lot. Any particular timing requirements of on-site
or off-site infrastructure necessary to provide adequate access and life-safety to the development can
be addressed with the development review of each restricted lot. The beneficial result, if this
variance is approved, would be that new roadways would be finished around the same time as
buildings, and won’t have to bear (or risk damage from) heavy construction traffic during site
construction.
Please note that the proposed changes to Conditions of Approval #3 and the Phasing Plan are based
on this variance being approved. If this variance is not approved the language can be changed back to
the timing requirements stated in the current code, without resubmitting new Conditions of Approval.
Application Materials
Materials provided with this submittal are outlined in the Table of Contents included with the
submittal. An A1 form and CVA are provided. The A1 form identifies the two applications being
reviewed as a SVAR (subdivision variance), and “Other – Revision to Conditions of Approval”.
74
Page | 3
With the variance submittal is the SVAR form and narrative response to the variance criteria. To
support the proposed revision to Conditions the following information is provided: a narrative;
revised Preliminary Plat; revised Subdivision Improvements Plans; and SUD Phase 3 Phasing Plan.
Noticing materials are also provided so these applications can be properly noticed to the public.
Please find enclosed applications for the above-described modifications and variance. If you have
any questions, please call me at (406) 522-8594.
Sincerely,
Stahly Engineering & Associates
__________________________
Zach Lowe, PE
Senior Project Engineer
enclosures
cc Jerry Pape, Triple Creek Realty
Bob Emery, RTR Holdings II, LLC
Randy Hecht, RTR Holdings II, LLC
75
South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision
2-12-21 Modification of Preliminary Plat Conditions and Variance Contents:
1.0 A1 Development Application / CVA Form ................................................................................... 5 Pages
2.0 SVAR Form ................................................................................................................................... 1 Page
2.1 Variance Narrative .............................................................................................................. 3 Pages
3.0 Preliminary Plat and Conditions of Approval Modification
3.1 Modification of Conditions Narrative ................................................................................. 2 Pages
3.2 Updated Plat ......................................................................................................................3 Sheets
3.3 Phase 3 Improvements (Sheets C 1.0 and C 1.1) ...............................................................2 Sheets
3.4 Proposed Phasing Plan .......................................................................................................7 Pages
4.0 N1 Form ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Page
4.1 Noticing Materials ............................................................................................................... 2 Pages
76
PROJECT INFORMATION
Project Name:
Project Type(s):
Street Address:
Legal Description:
Description of Project:
Current Zoning:
Gross Lot Area:
Block Frontage(s):
Number of Buildings:
Type and Number of Dwellings:
Building Size(s):
Building Height(s):
Number of Parking Spaces:
Affordable Housing (Y/N):
Cash-in-lieu Parkland (Y/N):
Departure/Deviation Request (Y/N):
A1
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
PROJECT IMAGE
Community Development
Development Review Application Page 1 of 3 Revision Date: June 2020
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
Overlay District: Neighborhood Conservation None
Urban Renewal District: Downtown North 7th Avenue Northeast North Park None
VICINITY MAP
77
78
APPLICATION FEE
Varies by project type
CONTACT US
Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building
20 East Olive Street
Bozeman, MT 59715
phone 406-582-2260
fax 406-582-2263
planning@bozeman.net
www.bozeman.net/planning
Development Review Application Page 3 of 3 Revision Date: June 2020
REQUIRED FORMS
Varies by project type
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
Check all that apply FORM
1. Administrative Interpretation Appeal AIA
2. Administrative Project Decision Appeal APA
3. Annexation and Initial Zoning ANNX
4. Commercial/Nonresidential COA CCOA
5. Comprehensive Sign Plan CSP
6. Condominium Review CR
7. Conditional Use Permit CUP
8. Extension to Approved Plan EXT
9. Growth Policy Amendment GPA
10. Informal Review INF
11. Master Site Plan MSP
12. Modification/Plan Amendment MOD
13. Neighborhood/Residential COA NCOA
14. Pre-application Consultation None
15. PUD Concept Plan PUDC
FORM
16. PUD Preliminary Plan PUDP
17. PUD Final Plan PUDFP
18. Reasonable Accommodation RA
19. Site Plan SP
20. Special Use Permit SUP
21. Special Temporary Use Permit STUP
22. Subdivision Exemption SE
23. Subdivision Pre-Application PA
24. Subdivision Preliminary Plan PP
25. Subdivision Final Plat FP
26. Wetland Review WR
27. Zone Map Amendment ZMA
28. Zone Text Amendment ZTA
29. Zoning/Subdivision Variance Z/SVAR
30. Zoning Deviation/Departure None
31. Other:
APPLICATION TYPE
79
80
Page 2 of 2 4-8-20
Printed Name:
Owner Signature
Printed Name:
If signing as a corporation or LLC, please provide the title and position of the individual signing on behalf of the corporation/LLC. Attach separate sheets for additional owner signatures.
81
SVAR
Subdivision Variance Required Materials SVAR Page 1 of 1 Revision Date 1-24-20 Required Forms: A1, N1, and PP and PP1 (if subdivision) Recommended Forms: Required Forms:
SUBDIVISION VARIANCE REQUIRED MATERIALS APPLICATION SETS 2 total sets are required that include 1 copy of every item below bound or folded into 8½ x 11 or 8½ x 14 sets Complete and signed development review application form A1. Plan sets that include all subdivision variance checklist items below unless otherwise provided in another application type. Standard application sets required plan sizes: 2 sets that include full size 24 x 36 inch plans 1 set that include 11 x 17 inch plans 2-digital versions of all materials (JPEG or PDF) on separate CD-ROM’s or USB drives. Individual files must be provided at 5MB or less in size. Files shall be named according to naming protocol.
Notes: All plans must be drawn to scale on paper not smaller than 8½ x 11 inches or larger than 24 x 36 inches. The name of the project must be shown on the cover sheet of the plans. If 3-ring binders will be used, they must include a table of contents and tabbed dividers between sections. Plans that are rolled or not bound into sets will not be accepted. NOTICING MATERIALS Completed and signed property adjoiners certificate form N1 and materials. APPLICATION FEE Base fee $1,830 Additional application fees may apply if concurrent with preliminary plat application. Application types and fees are cumulative. SUBDIVISION VARIANCE CHECKLIST 1. Bozeman Municipal Code Section proposed for variance: 2. Project Narrative providing a clear description of the variance requested and the reasons for the request and including detailed responses to the following: a. Response to the requirement that the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be injurious to other adjoining properties; b. Response to the requirement that because of the particular physical surroundings, shape or topographical conditions of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner would result if strict interpretation of this chapter is enforced; c. Response to the requirement that the variance will not cause a substantial increase in public cost; and d. Response to the requirement that the variance will not, in any manner, place the subdivision in nonconformance with any other provision of this chapter (Chapter 38, BMC) or with the city’s growth policy. 3. Location/vicinity map, including area within one-half mile of the site. 4. Site plan or plat as applicable with north arrow showing property dimensions subdivision layout, location of utilities, access, pedestrian facilities, and variance location. Suggested scale of 1 inch to 20 feet, but not less than 1 inch to 100 feet. 5. Other data or correspondence providing justification or evidence in support of the variance. CONTACT US Alfred M. Stiff Professional Building 20 East Olive Street 59715 (FED EX and UPS Only) PO Box 1230 Bozeman, MT 59771
phone 406-582-2260 fax 406-582-2263 planning@bozeman.net www.bozeman.net
82
Request for Variance South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision
Variance Narrative
Stahly Engineering
February 12, 2021
This is a request for a variance of BMC 38.270.030.B.b.(2) to allow for building permits to be obtained
for approved development on each of the four restricted lots prior to SUD Phase 3 Common Subdivision
Improvements and each lot’s off-site improvements being completed. All SUD Phase 3 Common
Subdivision Improvements, as well as each lot’s off-site improvements shall be completed prior to
occupancy.
BMC 38.270.030.B.b.(2) states:
(2) The subdivider must enter into an improvements agreement guaranteeing the completion of the
paving, curb, gutter, storm drainage, street lighting or other street infrastructure improvements not
yet completed. The improvements agreement must be financially guaranteed, as explained in this
article. However, at a minimum, the plans and specifications for the street improvements must be
approved by the review authority prior to final plat approval. Building permits will not be issued until
the street improvements are completed and accepted by the city unless otherwise provided for in
development proposals occurring under the provisions of division 38.430 of this chapter, Planned
Unit Development (PUD), and pursuant to the criteria established in subsection D of this section;
We are proposing this variance to allow for concomitant construction of buildings, subdivision
improvements, and each lot’s off-site improvements—moving improvements completion requirements
to receipt of Certificate of Occupancy.
In order to assist you in making findings, we ask you to consider the following points.
a. Response to the requirement that the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or general welfare, or be injurious to other adjoining properties.
This relaxation will not be detrimental to the public health, because:
1. This relaxation will apply to the four large tracts of land being created for
development in this subdivision only—the smallest tract being over 8 acres.
2. Each tract will have one owner/developer and the public will not have access to
these areas until required improvements are completed.
3. Subsequent subdivision or plan review could add more specific timing conditions to
protect the public health and safety as applicable for each project.
This variance also would not have injurious effects to adjacent properties, because:
4. The tracts are generally separate from each other and would not affect each other.
Block 4 is adjacent to The Arrow student housing development, but this variance
would decrease overall construction time and have reduced impacts on neighboring
developments.
5. The developments on these four lots will provide a mix of commercial, student
housing and ‘for rent’ housing, and these lots will be owned by a small number of
83
corporate entities—unlike purely residential subdivisions where hundreds of
residents and their contractors need access to their individually owned lots.
A Phasing Plan has been developed for this subdivision, which identifies specific ‘Common
Subdivision Improvements’ that will need to be installed before occupancy would be
permitted for any of the four Restricted Lots. The Applicant will install the ‘Common
Subdivision Improvements’ (shown in yellow on the accompanying ‘Phasing Plan Exhibit’).
The required improvements, costing approximately $3.8M; benefits to the public and the City
include:
• Looping of water mains,
• Stormwater retention/detention for South 19th Avenue and Stucky Road,
• Connectivity to the transportation network by extending Stucky from 19th Ave to 11th
Ave
• Widening of 19th Ave and a new signal at 19th and Stucky
b. Response to the requirement that because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical conditions of the specific property involved, an undue hardship to the owner
would result if strict interpretation of this chapter is enforced.
The undue hardships include:
• SUD Phase 3 Common Subdivision Improvements and each lot’s off-site
improvements for this development is estimated to cost in excess of $12 M, resulting
in a bond requirement of at 150% of $18M. This is significantly greater than 10% of
the City’s Annual budget.
• The scale of the proposed improvements, if concomitant construction is not
permitted, is larger than local construction companies can handle in one construction
season—creating significant timing and cost challenges.
The financial risk of tying up approximately $30M for over two years is an undue hardship to
the owner. The proposed phasing plan breaks the scope of the SUD Phase 3 subdivision
improvements into smaller, more fiscally-sensible projects. The phasing plan requires the
applicants to provide the backbone of access and utility connections to all of the Blocks and
requires future buyers of the restricted Blocks to build any and all required improvements
identified during subsequent City review, including—but not limited to—the streets and
utilities adjacent to their blocks at the buyer’s time of proposed development. The phasing
plan allows for autonomous development of the four independent, ‘Restricted Blocks.’
c. Response to the requirement that the variance will not cause a substantial increase in public
cost.
The proposed relaxation would not cause any increased cost to the public. This is a privately-
funded development there will no increased costs to the public. The proposed variance will
make development and construction more efficient—reducing construction time.
84
Additionally, the Subdivision Phasing Plan requires each phase of development to improve a
specific amount of parkland, which—in keeping with the developers commitment to quality,
as in the previous two phases of the South University District Subdivision—has typically been
in excess of what City Code requires.
This variance would make the development process in Bozeman more competitive with other
regional municipalities, when dealing with projects with value many times greater than the
Bozeman’s annual budget—South University District is anticipated to carry over $450 M of
development. The City receives 30% of every property tax dollar in South University District.
d. Response to the requirement that the variance will not, in any manner, place the subdivision in
non-conformance with any other provision of this chapter (Chapter 38, BMC) or with the City’s
growth policy.
We are not aware of any non-conformance issues with Chapter 38 BMC nor the City’s growth
policy. The Restricted Lot status of the four proposed lots will allow the City to address any
code conformance issues that may arise during the required subsequent reviews.
85
SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision
Preliminary Plat and Conditions of Approval Modifications
February 12, 2021
This application proposes minor modifications to Conditions of Approval # 3 and #8 in addition to Code
Correction #13.
1. Condition of Approval #3 Modification. This condition is proposed to be slightly modified to reflect
development restrictions on the four ‘restricted lots’—as a non-financial guarantee of subdivision
improvements. Red text denotes added wording, and strikethroughs denote wording removed.
Note that Lot 1 Block is now proposed as a restricted lot in accordance with the proposed Phasing
Plan. Plan review was added as an alternate means of lifting development restrictions. Minor
grammatical inconsistencies and code references were corrected. Proposed wording for Condition
#3 is shown below. There are two versions of this condition based on whether the variance is
approved. The first version shows timing of infrastructure completion as proposed if the variance is
approved. If the variance is not approved, the language would be changed to the timing
requirements stated in the current code, as shown in the second version.
Wording if Variance is approved:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to all potential purchasers of Lot 1 Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2;
Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District Phase 3 Major
Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, that the final plat of the
subdivision was approved by the Bozeman City Commission without completion of
certain on and off site improvements required under the Bozeman Municipal Code, as is
allowed in Chapter 38.39 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal code. As such, this
Restriction is filed with the final plat that stipulates that any use of these lots is subject to
further subdivision or plan review, and no certificate of occupancy development of this
these lots shall occur be granted until all on and off site improvements are completed as
required under the Bozeman Municipal Code. THEREFORE, BE ADVISED, that Building
Permits Certificates of Occupancy will not be issued for Lot 1 Block 1, Lot 1 Block 2, Lot 1
Bock 3, and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision, City
of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana until all required on and off site improvements for
SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision are completed and accepted by the City of Bozeman in
accordance with the accepted Phasing Improvements Plan for SUD Phase 3 Major
Subdivision. No building structure requiring water or sewer facilities shall be utilized
granted occupancy on this these lots until the restriction is lifted. This restriction runs with
the land and is revocable only by further subdivision, plan review, or the written consent
of the City of Bozeman.
Wording if Variance is NOT approved:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to all potential purchasers of Lot 1 Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2;
Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District Phase 3 Major
Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana, that the final plat of the
subdivision was approved by the Bozeman City Commission without completion of
certain on and off site improvements required under the Bozeman Municipal Code, as is
allowed in Chapter 38.39 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal code. As such, this
Restriction is filed with the final plat that stipulates that any use of these lots is subject to
86
further subdivision or plan review, and no development of this these lots shall occur until
all on and off site improvements are completed as required under the Bozeman Municipal
Code. THEREFORE, BE ADVISED, that Building Permits will not be issued for Lot 1
Block 1, Lot 1 Block 2, Lot 1 Bock 3, and Lot 1 Block 4 of the South University District
Phase 3 Major Subdivision, City of Bozeman, Gallatin County, Montana until all required
on and off site improvements for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision are completed and
accepted by the City of Bozeman in accordance with the accepted Phasing
Improvements Plan for SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision. No building structure requiring
water or sewer facilities shall be utilized on this these lots until the restriction is lifted. This
restriction runs with the land and is revocable only by further subdivision, plan review, or
the written consent of the City of Bozeman.
2. Condition of Approval #8 Modification. Since the phasing plan changes the required SUD Phase 3
subdivision improvements, this affects Conditions of Approval #8, which references the original
extent of the subdivision improvements. The wording of this condition will not change, but the
referenced plan sheets C 1.0 and C 1.1 have been updated to clearly show the new extent of the SUD
Phase 3 subdivision improvements.
3. Code Correction #13 Modification. Since the phasing plan changes the required SUD Phase 3
subdivision improvements, this affects Code Correction #13, which references the original extent of
the subdivision improvements. The wording of this condition will not change, but the referenced
plan sheets C 1.0 and C 1.1 have been updated to clearly show the new extent of the SUD Phase 3
subdivision improvements.
Minor changes to the Preliminary Plat are necessary to support the proposed modifications to the
Conditions of Approval. A revised preliminary plat is provided which clearly depicts proposed changes.
A summary of the changes to the previously approved Preliminary Plat are:
1. Plat Sheet 2 of 3: Lot 1, Block 1 changed from a develop-able lot to a “Restricted” lot,
2. Plat Sheet 2 of 3: ROW for Blocks 3 and 4 dedicated to the City of Bozeman—specifically Arnold
St between S 19th Avenue and S 11th Avenue, S 14th Avenue between Student Drive and S 17th
Avenue between Stucky Road and Arnold Street,
3. Plat Sheet 3 of 3: ‘City Park Improvements’ section. Parkland allocation has been re-
apportioned – assigning parkland requirements for Lot 1 Block 1,
4. Plat Sheet 3 of 3: Condition of Approval #1. The condition of approval #1 has been updated to
reflect proposed modifications to Conditions of Approval and Variance. Note if this variance is
not approved, the alternate wording will be used for this condition.
87
88
SOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT: PHASE 3
ADJACENT OWNERSHIP FIGURE
1
2
3 4 5
6
7
8
SUBJECT PROPERTY:
SUD PHASE 3
910
11
12
13
14
15 16 17
1819 2021
4
89
1/13/2021South University Phase III Adjacent Owners ListMap ID Legal Description Name Mailing Address City State Zip Code Geo Code Adjoiner1 MDT Montana Department of Transportation P.O. Box 201001 Helena MT 59620-1001 YES2 S13 T02 S, R05 E, COS 2661A, Tract 1A Cheryl Boylan 1550 W. Kagy Boulevard Bozeman MT 59715-6510 06-0798-13-3-01-01-0000 YES3 S13 T02 S, R05 E, COS 2661A, Tract 3A Peggy Easton 167 Cougar Drive Bozeman MT 59718-8358 06-0798-13-3-02-03-0000 YES4 South University District Ph2, S13 T02 S, R05 E, Lot 2, Plat J-605 City of Bozeman PO Box 1230 Bozeman MT 59771-1230 06-0798-24-2-01-20-6500 YES5 South University District Ph1, S13 T02 S, R05 E, Lot 2, Plat J-518 CCC Bozeman, LLC 431 Office Park Dr Mountain Brk AL 35223-2411 06-0798-24-2-01-01-0000 YES6 South University District Ph2, S13 T02 S, R05 E, Lot 2, Plat J-605 CCC Bozeman, LLC 431 Office Park Dr Mountain Brk AL 35223-2411 06-0798-24-2-01-08-0000 YES7 Allison Sub Ph3A, S24, T02S, R05 E, Lot 1, Plat J-584 Bon Ton, Inc. P.O. Box 906 Bozeman MT 59771-0906 06-0798-24-4-01-99-0000 YES8 Allison Sub Annex, S24, T02S, R05 E, SE4NW4 Bon Ton, Inc. P.O. Box 906 Bozeman MT 59771-0906 06-0798-24-4-01-98-0000 YES9 MS 494, S24, T02 S, R05 E, Block 1 Lot 4 Gilhousen Community Property TR DTD 3/30/99 599 Hightower Rd Bozeman MT 59718-8163 06-0798-24-2-01-04-0000 YES10 MS 494, S24, T02 S, R05 E, Block 1 Common Open Space Gilhousen Community Property TR DTD 3/30/99 599 Hightower Rd Bozeman MT 59718-8163 06-0798-24-2-01-16-6500 YES11 Minor Sub 235, S23, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 1 G Force 1 LLC 1320 Manley Rd Bozeman MT 59715-8779 06-0798-23-1-01-01-0000 YES12 S23, T02 S, R05 E, COS 1969 Tract 1 Grace Bible Church Limited of Bozeman 3625 S. 19th Avenue Bozeman MT 59718-9108 06-0798-23-1-01-01-0900 YES13 Minor Sub 191, S14, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 2A Steven R. & Ralph K. Aaker 1461 Monroe Place Louisville CO 80027-1560 06-0798-14-4-02-20-0000 YES14 S14, T02 S, R05 E, COS 2008A Tract 1A 19th Capital Group, LLC 19 Lariat Loop Bozeman MT 59715-9200 06-0798-14-4-02-08-0000 YES15 Kagy Crossroads Sub, S14 T02 S, R05 E, Block 1, Lot 4-5, Plat J-328-A Stockman Bank of Montana P.O. Box 250 Miles City MT 59301-0250 06-0798-14-4-01-30-0000 YES16 Remington ADD, S13, T02 S, R05 E, Lot 7 Church of Christ of Bozeman 1825 W. Kagy Boulevard Bozeman MT 59715-6505 06-0798-13-3-28-04-0000 YES17 Hawks Ridge Condo, S13, T02 S, R05 E, Tract A, COS 573 Hawks Ridge HOA, Inc 716 S. 20th Ave., Suite 102 Bozeman MT 59718 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7000 YES17-1 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1715 James C Ruger & Sara Schnittgrund 1715 West Kagy Boulevard Bozeman MT 59715 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7001 YES17-2 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1717 Lee Living Trust 7150 Schafer Rd Bozeman MT 59715-7777 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7002YES17-3 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1719 Fenqjen Luo 607 LEXINGTON DR Bozeman MT 59715-7169 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7003 YES17-4 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1721 Claudio Kaempfen 4641 Pannonia Rd Carlsbad CA 92008-3667 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7004 YES17-5 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1723 William Finkle 10490 Holman Ave Los Angeles CA 90024-6013 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7005 YES17-6 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1725 Eyer Family Revocable Trust 662 Wintergreen Lane Bozeman MT 59715-7855 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7006 YES17-7 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1727 Brunner Investments, LLC PO Box 160881 Big Sky MT 59716-0881 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7007 YES17-8 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1729 Michael L. & Callie C. Peters 14 Chinook Trl Bozeman MT 59718-9412 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7008 YES17-9 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1731 HR Condos 710 East Fridley Bozeman MT 59715 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7009 YES17-10 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1733 Cormier Family Trust 4443 Wellington Rd Boulder CO 80301 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7010 YES17-11 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1735 Performance Investment Properties 2724 E Lakin Dr Ste #1 Flagstaff AZ 86004-3900 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7011 YES17-12 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1737 William Finkle 10490 Holman Ave Los Angeles CA 90024-6013 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7012 YES17-13 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1739 Angie Lee 7150 Schafer Rd Bozeman MT 59715-7777 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7013 YES17-14 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1741 Charles M. Lawrence & Crista S. Merzdorf 1128 Holly Dr Bozeman MT 59715-593306-0798-13-3-01-18-7014 YES17-15 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1743 Scott H. Luckay 600 Triple Tree RD Bozeman MT 597157851 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7015 YES17-16 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1745 Dale H. & Brit D. Jackson 1116 23RD AVE SW Great Falls MT 59404-3437 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7016 YES17-17 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1747 Christopher T Geddes 19 Pacific Bay Circle Apt #303 San Bruno CA 94066 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7017 YES17-18 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1749 Claudio Kaempfen 4641 Pannonia Rd Carlsbad CA 92008-3667 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7018 YES17-19 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1751 Stephen M. Seeger & Beth A. Daly 20 Barley Field CT Dickerson MD 20842-8806 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7019 YES17-20 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1753 William R. & Karen L Bailey 1753 W. Kagy Boulevard Bozeman MT 59715 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7020 YES17-21 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1755 Scott H. Luckay 600 Triple Tree RD Bozeman MT 59715-7851 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7021 YES17-22 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1757 Charles M. Lawrence & Crista S. Merzdorf 1128 Holly Dr Bozeman MT 59715-593306-0798-13-3-01-18-7022 YES17-23 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1759 Lee Living Trust 7150 Schafer Rd Bozeman MT 59715-7777 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7023 YES17-24 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1761 Thomas Williams 868 Western DR Santa Cruz CA 95060-3035 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7024 YES17-25 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1763 Will J. & Christine M. Kern 16125 Pryor Rd Billings MT 59101 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7025 YES17-26 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1765 Deborah L. Meyer P.O. Box 2045 Arvada CO 80001-2045 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7026 YES17-27 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1767 Michael L. & Callie C. Peters 14 Chinook Trl Bozeman MT 59718-9412 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7027 YES17-28 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1769 Lei Cai & Mengyao Liu 2 Erin CT Bridgewater NJ 08807-5518 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7028 YES17-29 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1771 Gregg T. & Kristin K. Lundin 7855 Parkwood Drive Missoula MT 59808 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7029 YES17-30 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1773 Bobcat Boarding, LLC 2300 Shootin Iron Ranch Road Jackson WY 83001 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7030 YES17-31 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1775 Deborah Schonscheck 16417 E Auburn Hills DR Parker CO 80134-3037 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7031 YES17-32 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1777 Knute H. & Marne B. Oaas 1238 W Gold ST Butte MT 59701-2110 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7032 YES17-33 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1779 Sachs Corporation 4480 Bannock DR Bozeman MT 59715-9303 06-0798-13-3-01-18-7033 YES17-34 Hawks Ridge Condominiums Tract A COS 573 Unit 1781 Brenda L. Blazer 431B East Brandon DR Bismark ND 58503 YES18 S13 T02 S, R05 E, Tract B, COS 573 YMA Properties 1705 W Kagy Blvd Bozeman MT 59715-6513 06-0798-13-3-01-14-0000 YES19 Beatty Sub, S13, T02 S, R05 E, Tract 31 & Part W2 of Tract 11 (Parcel #4) Edward A. & Constance B. Dratz 114 Sir Arthur Dr Bozeman MT 59718-7866 06-0798-13-3-30-37-0000 YES20 Beattys Sub, S13, T02 S, R05 E, Tract 29 less Hwy Right of way 1605 W Kagy LLC P.O. Box 4730 Bozeman MT 59772-4730 06-0798-13-3-30-35-0000 YES21 Beattys Sub, S13, T02 S, R05 E, Tract 8 less Hwy Right of way 1805 Willow Way LLC P.O. Box 4730 Bozeman MT 59772-4730 06-0798-13-3-30-07-0000 YESADJOINER (Master List - Owners within 200' of proposed SUD Phase 3 Major Subdivision)Page 1PH 3 Adjacent Owner List 01-13-21.xlsx90
South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision
Phasing Plan to Facilitate Written Concomitant Construction Approval
prepared for:
prepared by:
October 2020
91
South University District Phase 3 Major Subdivision Phasing Plan
Introduction
The intent of this proposed phasing plan is to establish a basis for a “concomitant construction”
approach permitting the simultaneous or near-to-simultaneous construction of various infrastructure
elements and off and on-site improvements within SUD Phase 3 and its Restricted Blocks 1-4. Herein we
identify key components of the South University District (SUD) Ph 3 Major Subdivision that would be
considered ‘Common Subdivision Improvements’ and are integral connections within the City of
Bozeman’s transportation and utility networks. These Common Subdivision Improvements would need
to be installed before any grant of occupancy could occur on any of the 4 ‘Restricted ’lots on Blocks 1-4.
If this Plan is approved, the City is being asked to provide a binding, written authorization for
“concomitant construction” and to permit a notice regarding said authorization on the SUD Phase 3
Final Plat.
Common Subdivision Improvements
Certain elements critical to the subdivision’s utility and transportation network have been identified,
with input from the City of Bozeman, that would be required to be installed by the property
developers—herein these are referred to as "Common Subdivision Improvements” and shown in yellow
on the enclosed “Infrastructure improvements Phasing Exhibit”. These Common Subdivision
Improvements generally include extending Stucky Road from South 19th Ave east to the round-about at
South 14th Ave, and widening South 19th Ave along the entire western project boundary between Kagy
Blvd and Arnold St. They also include installing storm drainage improvements within the Park 4 lot that
receives runoff from Stucky and 19th Ave. A specific list of the Common Subdivision Improvements
follows:
Widen S 19th Ave from Kagy Blvd to Arnold St
o install 10-ft wide asphalt sidewalk
o Pipe existing irrigation ditch
o Install irrigation and trees within boulevard
o Improve existing traffic signal at Stucky Rd and S 19th Ave
Stucky Road from 19th Ave to 14th Ave- 48-ft width
o Stucky Road sidewalks on both sides of City Park, and along north side of road between
17th Ave and 19th Ave
Stucky Road 12” water main between 19th Ave and 14th Ave
Stucky Road 8” sewer main (approximately 340 feet)
Stucky Road storm
92
o Approx. 100 ft of 18” storm main
o Approx. 340 ft of 24” storm main
o Approx 340 ft of 30” storm main
o Approx 190 ft of 36” storm main
o Approx 8 catch basins
o 5 storm manholes
Parkland Improvements
As mentioned previously, the 1.83-ac ‘City Park 4 ’lot will contain the stormwater detention pond that
accepts runoff from S 19th Ave, Stucky Rd, and S 17th Ave. The detention pond takes up 0.431 acres, but
the remaining 1.399 acres will be seeded, landscaped, and irrigated.
Miscellaneous Improvements
There is an existing irrigation easement on the property that will be relocated within a 20-ft easement
within the Park 3 and Park 4 lots. The existing shallow ditch will be piped in a new 15” PVC pipe along
the western edge of the Park 3 and Park 4 lots.
93
Blocks 1 & 2
Due to their proximity to each other and the initial ‘Common Subdivision Improvements ’the Block 1 & 2
Off-Site Improvements will both need to be constructed at the same time. Depending on the timing of
development, the first of these two Blocks to develop first will need to construct the developments for
both and create a payback district for the second developer.
Block 1 & 2 Off-Site Improvements
Block 1 & 2 Off Site Improvements proposed in this phasing plan and shown in blue on the enclosed
‘Infrastructure improvements Phasing Exhibit ’generally include extending 17th Ave between Stucky
Road and Kagy Blvd, and the segment of State Street from South 19th Ave east to South 17th Ave. They
also include installing storm drainage improvements within the four ‘Common Open Space ’lots (two on
Block 1 and two on Block 2) lot that receive runoff from 17th Ave and State Street. A specific list of the
Common Subdivision Improvements follows:
S 17th Ave from Stucky Rd to Kagy Blvd- 47-ft width
State St from S 19th Ave to S 17th Ave- 35-ft width
8” Water mains in State St and S 17th Ave
Connect to existing sanitary sewer main in Kagy Blvd
8” Sanitary Sewer mains in State St and S 17th Ave
Buried Stormwater retention basins (4) and associated mains
5’ concrete sidewalk along east side of S 17th Ave
10’ temporary asphalt sidewalk along Kagy Blvd between S 19th Ave and S 17th Ave
Parkland Improvements
Parkland requirements will be determined by the nature of the development(s) proposed within each of
the Blocks at the Site Plan level, but the South University District Property Owners Association (POA) will
require each block to develop a proportionate share of the remaining undeveloped 14.01-acre ‘City Park
3 ’lot. Block 1 will be required to develop 18.1% of Park 3, or 2.54 acres; Block 2 will be required to
develop 19.8% of Park 3, or 2.77 acres.
Miscellaneous
Development on either Block 1 or Block 2 will trigger the cash-in-lieu of Improvements (CILI)
requirements for the subdivision’s proportionate share of Kagy Blvd.
94
Block 3
The Block 3 Off-Site Improvements include the adjacent streets to the south and east, as well as the
portion of Arnold St along the south boundary of the ‘City Park 3 ’lot.
Block 3 Off-Site Improvements
Block 3 Off Site Improvements proposed in this phasing plan and shown in orange on the enclosed
‘Infrastructure improvements Phasing Exhibit ’generally include extending 17th Ave between Stucky
Road and Arnold St, and constructing Arnold St. from South 19th Ave east to South 14th Ave. A specific
list of the Common Subdivision Improvements follows:
S 17th Ave from Stucky Rd to Arnold St- 47-ft width
Arnold St from S 19th Ave to S 14th Ave- 35-ft width
8” Water mains in Arnold St and S 17th Ave
8” Sanitary Sewer mains in Arnold St and S 17th Ave
Stormwater catch basins and associated mains
6’-wide, 6” thick concrete sidewalk along park frontage on east side of S 17th Ave and north side
of Arnold St.
Parkland Improvements
Parkland requirements will be determined by the nature of the development(s) proposed within each of
the Blocks at the Site Plan level, but the South University District Property Owners Association (POA) will
require each block to develop a proportionate share of the remaining undeveloped 14.01-acre ‘City Park
3 ’lot. Block 3 will be required to develop 37.3% of Park 3, or 5.22 acres.
Miscellaneous
Depending on the timing of development of Block 3 and/or the property to the south of Arnold St, the
first to develop will likely need to construct both halves of Arnold St and create a payback district for the
second developer.
95
Block 4
The Block 4 Off-Site Improvements generally include constructing the segment of S 14th Ave adjacent to
the property. Depending on the timing of development, the first of these two Blocks to develop first will
need to construct the developments for both and create a payback district for the second developer.
Block 4 Off-Site Improvements
Block 4 Off Site Improvements proposed in this phasing plan and shown in green on the enclosed
‘Infrastructure improvements Phasing Exhibit ’generally include extending 14th Ave between Student Dr
and Arnold St, and the segment of Arnold Street from S 11th Ave east to S 14th Ave. A specific list of the
Common Subdivision Improvements follows:
S 14th Ave from Arnold St to Student Dr- 35-ft width
Arnold St from S 11th Ave to S 14th Ave- 35-ft width
8” Water mains in Arnold and S 14th Ave
8” Sanitary Sewer mains in Arnold St and S 14th Ave
Stormwater detention/retention basins and associated mains
Parkland Improvements
Parkland requirements will be determined by the nature of the development(s) proposed within each of
the Blocks at the Site Plan level, but the South University District Property Owners Association (POA) will
require each block to develop a proportionate share of the remaining undeveloped 14.01-acre ‘City Park
3 ’lot. Block 4 will be required to develop 24.7% of Park 3, or 3.46 acres.
Miscellaneous
Depending on the timing of development of Block 4 and/or the property to the south of Arnold St, the
first to develop will likely need to construct both halves of Arnold St and create a payback district for the
second developer.
South 11th Ave was constructed in 2018 and there is a payback district associated with that project
allocated to Block 4.
96
STATE STREETSOUTH 17TH AVE
KAGY BLVDSOUTH 19TH AVESOUTH 17TH AVESTUCKY ROADSTUCKY ROADSOUTH 14TH AVE
STUDENT DRIVESOUTH 11TH AVESTUCKY ROADARNOLD STREETSOUTH 11TH AVE
SOUTH 14TH AVE
SOUTH 17TH AVEARNOLD STREETSOUTH 19TH AVE Proposed RestrictedBlock 1Lot 18.20 AcresProposed Block 1 CommonOpen Space Lot 10.09 AcresProposed Block 2 CommonOpen Space Lot 10.07 AcresProposed Block 1 CommonOpen Space Lot 20.07 AcresProposed RestrictedBlock 2Lot 18.60 AcresProposed Block 2 CommonOpen Space Lot 20.07 AcresProposed Right of Way6.37 Acres Proposed RestrictedBlock 3Lot 118.86 AcresProposed RestrictedBlock 4Lot 111.89 AcresCity Park 41.83 AcresCity Park 314.01 AcresExtents of Subdivisionimprovements to becompleted beforeoccupancy of any lot inthe SUD Ph 3 MajSubdivisionExtents of off-site improvements to be completed beforeoccupancy of Block 4 in the SUD Ph 3 Maj SubdivisionExtents of off-siteimprovements to becompleted beforeoccupancy of Block 3in the SUD Ph 3 MajSubdivisionExtents of off-siteimprovements to becompleted beforeoccupancy of Blocks 1or 2 in the SUD Ph 3Maj SubdivisionBlock 2 Portion of City Park 319.8%Block 4 Portion of City Park 324.7%Block 3 Portion of City Park 337.3%Block 1 Portion of City Park 4100%Block 1 Portion of City Park 318.1%P
R
E
L
IM
I
N
A
R
YFOR SUBDIVISION REVIEWPROFESSIONALENGINEERS &SURVEYORS1 OF 1INFRASTRUCTUREIMPROVEMENTSPHASING EXHIBITSUD PHASE 3SOUTH UNIVERSITYDISTRICTSTAHLYENGINEERING& ASSOCIATESRTR HOLDINGS II, LLCSUBDIVISIONIMPROVEMENTSBLOCK 3BLOCKS 1 & 2BLOCK 4PROPERTY BOUNDARY97
S.U.D. PH3-THIS PLAT1 OF 3FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT NO. ____________PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS & SURVEYORSSTAHLY ENGINEERING & ASSOCIATESPRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLATSOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PHASE 3 MAJOR SUBDIVISION LOCATED IN THE SW1/4 OF S13 & THE NW1/4 OF S24, T2S, R5E, P.M.M.UPON LOT 2 OF SOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PH. 2 (PLAT J-605) CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANAVICINITY MAP- NOT TO SCALE98
BLOCK 1 Common Open SpaceLot 2 0.07 Acres 2,850.00 SFBLOCK 2 Common Open SpaceLot 1 0.07 Acres 2,850.00 SFBLOCK 2 Common Open SpaceLot 2 0.09 Acres 4,002.27 SFBLOCK 1 CommonOpen Space Lot 10.09 Acres4,001.27 SFBLOCK 4 Lot 1517,929.62 SF11.89 AcresBLOCK 2, Lot 18.60 Acres374,776.18 SFBLOCK 1Lot 18.20 Acres357,121.08 SFBLOCK 3 Lot 118.86 Acres 821,436.89 SFCity Park 314.01 Acres610257.25 SFCity Park 4 1.83 Acres79,492.47 SFSEE DETAIL-1SEE DETAIL-2SEE DETAIL-3BLOCK 2Common OpenSpace Lot 20.09 Acres4,002.27 SFBLOCK 1Common OpenSpace Lot 20.07 Acres2,850.00SFBLOCK 1Common OpenSpace Lot 10.09 Acres4,001.27SFBLOCK 2Common OpenSpace Lot 10.07 Acres2850.00 SFROW(1)=6.37Acres277,465.93 SFDDROW(2)=5.45 Acres 237517.97 SF2 OF 3FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT NO. ____________PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS & SURVEYORSSTAHLY ENGINEERING & ASSOCIATESPRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLATSOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PHASE 3 MAJOR SUBDIVISIONLOCATED IN THE SW1/4 OF S13 & THE NW1/4 OF S24, T2S, R5E, P.M.M.UPON LOT 2 OF SOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PH. 2 (PLAT J-605)CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANADETAIL 3 - 1"=30'DETAIL 1 - 1"=30'DETAIL 2 - 1"=30'BLOCK 1 CHANGED TO'RESTRICTED' LOTSTREET ROW GRANTED INBLOCKS 3 & 499
3 OF 3
FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT NO. ____________
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
STAHLY ENGINEERING & ASSOCIATES
SOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PHASE 3 MAJOR SUBDIVISION
LOCATED IN THE SW1/4 OF S13 & THE NW1/4 OF S24, T2S, R5E, P.M.M.
UPON LOT 2 OF SOUTH UNIVERSITY DISTRICT PH. 2 (PLAT J-605)
CITY OF BOZEMAN, GALLATIN COUNTY, MONTANA
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
BLOCK 1 CHANGED TO
'RESTRICTED' LOT, UPDATED
LANGUAGE
REVISED PARKLAND DISTRIBUTION
100
FUTURETRAILS (TYP)WETLANDSMANDEVILLE CREEKSOUTH 14TH AVEY3Y3Y3Y3P3SOUTH 14TH AVEProposed RestrictedBlock 1Lot 18.20 AcresProposed Block 1 CommonOpen Space Lot 10.09 AcresProposed Block 2 CommonOpen Space Lot 10.07 AcresProposed Block 1 CommonOpen Space Lot 20.07 AcresSTUCKY RD(48' WIDTH - 90' ROW)Proposed RestrictedBlock 2Lot 18.60 AcresSTATE ST(35' WIDTH - 60' ROW)S 17TH AVE
(47' WIDTH - 70' ROW)PIPE IRRIGATION DITCHALONG PROPERTYFRONTAGEWIDEN S 19TH AVE TO 41'FROM CL TO BACK OFCURB ON EAST SIDENEW S 19TH AVECURB INLET TOSUD PONDCONSTRUCTMEANDERING 10'WIDE CONCRETESIDEWALK ALONG S19TH AVE.MODIFICATION OFEXISTING TRAFFICSIGNAL ON CAMPUSAND 19TH NEW DETENTIONPONDPOND OUTFALLSTRUCTURE45" x 73" ARC CULVERT (60"EQUIVALENT ROUND) ATMANDEVILLE CREEKCROSSINGCONSTRUCT ROUNDABOUTAT CAMPUS BLVD AND S17TH AVEEXISTINGTRAILS (TYP)RELOCATEPOWER POLESPEDESTRIANCROSSWALKNEW S 19TH AVECURB ONEXISTING SYSTEMEXISTING TRAILMODIFICATIONNEW STREETLIGHTS (TYP)SETBACK ZONE 1SETBACK ZONE 2CONNECT TOEXISTING CURBCONNECT TOEXISTING CURBCONNECT TOEXISTINGSIDEWALKINTERIM RIGHT IN RIGHTOUT APPROACH ONTOKAGY (TYP)NEW PUBLIC ACCESSEASEMENT WHERE S 19THWIDENS FROM 60' ROW TO88' ROW FROM CLINTERIM RIGHT INRIGHT OUTAPPROACHCONNECT TOEXISTING WATERCONNECT TO EXISTINGSEWER MANHOLE IN KAGYNEW 10' UTIL EASE(TYP)EX 28.58' IRR EASENEW 20' GAS EASEPER EX GASBLANKET EASES 19TH AVE Proposed Block 2 CommonOpen Space Lot 20.07 AcresBOULEVARDLANDSCAPINGWATER CONNECTIONSTUB WATERFOR FUTUREEXTENSION(TYP)CONNECT TOEXISTING WATERCONNECT TOEXISTING WATERNEW HYDRANT ONEXISTING MAIN(TYP, 1 OF 4)12" LOOP MAINBETWEEN S 19THAVE AND 11TH AVE8" STUB FOR FUTUREMAIN EXTENSIONCONNECT TOEXISTING WATERNEW HYDRANT(TYP)NEW HYDRANT ONEXISTING MAIN(TYP, 1 OF 4)NEW WATERMAIN (TYP)NEW SEWERMAIN (TYP)NEW 8" SEWER STUBFOR FUTURE USE (TYP)60' WIDTH FROM CLTO PROPERTY LINE88' WIDTH FROM CLTO PROPERTY LINE41' WIDTH FROM CLTO BACK OF CURBMIDDLECREEKIRRIGATIONDITCHDIVERSIONMIDDLE CREEKIRRIGATION DITCH10:1 TAPER53' WIDTH FROM CLTO BACK OF CURBPROPOSED 70'PUBLIC STREET ANDUTILITY EASEMENTEXISTING 90' PUBLIC
STREET AND UTILITY
EASEMENTProposed Right of Way6.37 AcresCONNECT TOEXISTINGROUNDABOUTNEW 8" SEWER STUBFOR FUTURE USE (TYP)8" STUB FORFUTURE USE24" STUB FORFUTURE USE24" STUB FORFUTURE USENEW STORMMAIN (TYP)MODIFY MEDIANSTRIPING FOR LEFTTURN LANESTUCKY STRIPINGMODIFICATIONSAWCUT 1' PAST EDGEOF EXISTINGPAVEMENTMANDEVILLE CREEKADJUST MEDIAN STRIPING TOACCOMMODATE TRAVELLANES AS NEEDED (TYP)MODIFY STRIPING TOCONNECT TO EXISTINGSTRIPING TO SOUTHREMOVE EXISTINGAREA INLET FUTURE S 17TH AVE
(47' WIDTH - 70' ROW)NEW LIGHTING ON EASTSIDE OF S 19TH AVE TEMPORARY ASPHALTSIDEWALK ALONG KAGYNEW FES ATIRRIGATION DITCHPIPE INTAKECONNECT TO EXISTING30" RCP IRRIGATIONPIPEBOULEVARD LANDSCAPING AREASSHOWN WITH TREES (TYP)KAGY BLVD(ROW VARIES)NEW SIDEWALK (HATCHED)CONSTRUCT LOTAPPROACH (TYP)CONSTRUCT NEW 2.5' DEEPDITCH ALONG KAGYFRONTAGEINSTALL CULVERT UNDERKAGY APPROACHCONNECT TOEXISTING WATERUTILITY SLEEVES (TYP)DEFER BOULEVARDLANDSCAPING ADJACENTTO SITE TO FUTURE SITEDEVELOPMENT (TYP) Proposed RestrictedBlock 3Lot 118.86 AcresIRRIGATIONPIPINGSTUCKY RD(48' WIDTH - 90' ROW)KAGY BLVD(ROW VARIES)FUTURE ARNOLD ST(35' WIDTH - 70' ROW)ASPHALT WIDENING(HATCHED)VISION TRIANGLES(TYP)EX. 18" CMP CULVERTTO BE ABANDONEDNEW 10' UTIL EASE(TYP)EX 28.58' IRR EASENEW 20' GAS EASEPER EX GASBLANKET EASE60' WIDTH FROM CLTO PROPERTY LINE88' WIDTH FROM CLTO PROPERTY LINEEXISTINGIRRIGATIONEASEMENTNEW STRIPING (TYP)ABANDON EXISTING IRRIGATIONDITCH AND REMOVE EXISTINGBARBED WIRE FENCERELOCATE IRRIGATIONEASEMENT AND PIPE DITCHIN NEW LOCATIONRELOCATEDIRRIGATIONEASEMENTDO NOT DISTURBEXISTINGDIVERSIONCONNECT TOEXISTINGIRRIGATION DITCHCONSTRUCT NEWIRRIGATION PIPEIRRIGATIONMANHOLE (TYP) FUTURE S 14TH AVEEXISTING 90' PUBLIC
STREET AND UTILITY
EASEMENTPROPOSED 10'UTILITY EASEMENT(TYP)City Park 41.83 Acres(ROW WIDTH VARIES)S 19TH AVE
(ROW WIDTH VARIES)
S 19TH AVE
(ROW WIDTH VARIES)SUD PHASE 3BOUNDARYSUD PHASE 3BOUNDARYADJUST EXISTINGHYDRANTS (TYP)REMOVE EXISTINGHYDRANT (TYP)City Park 314.01 AcresTRAILBENCH MARKCAP BOLT =4945.60REMOVEEXISTINGTREESREMOVE EXISTINGTREES (TYP OF 6)REMOVEEXISTINGTREES FUTURE SIDEWALK (TYP.) FUTURESIDEWALK (TYP.) FUTURE SIDEWALKFUTURESIDEWALK(TYP.)C 1.0
SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS &
SURVEYORS
SUD PHASE 3STAHLY
ENGINEERING
& ASSOCIATES
RTR HOLDINGS II,LLCPROPOSED COMMONSUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS101
HYDHYDHYD
CAMPUS BLVDSOUTH 11TH AVESOUTH 11TH AVESTUDENT DRIVESOUTH 14TH AVESUD PHASE 1HCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHCHC
Y4Y4Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y4Y3Y3Y3Y2Y2Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3Y3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3P3HCHCHCHCP3P3Y3P3P3Y3Y3Y3Y3CAMPUS BLVDCAMPUS BLVDSOUTH 14TH AVESTUCKY RD(48' WIDTH - 90' ROW)EXISTINGTRAILS (TYP)EXISTING TRAILMODIFICATIONCONNECT TOEXISTING WATERCONNECT TOEXISTINGROUNDABOUTFUTURE ARNOLD ST(35' WIDTH - 70' ROW)Proposed RestrictedBlock 4Lot 111.89 Acres FUTURE S 14TH AVESOUTH 13TH AVESOUTH 12TH AVEEXISTING 70' PUBLICSTREET AND UTILITYEASEMENTEXISTING 35' PUBLIC
STREET AND UTILITY
EASEMENT
PROPOSED 10'UTILITY EASEMENT(TYP)EXISTING SUDPHASE 1 EXISTING SUDPHASE 2City Park 41.83 AcresSUD PHASE 3BOUNDARYSUD PHASE 3BOUNDARYCity Park 314.01 AcresTRAILBENCH MARKCAP BOLT =4945.60C 1.1
SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENTS
PLAN
PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS &
SURVEYORS
SUD PHASE 3STAHLY
ENGINEERING
& ASSOCIATES
RTR HOLDINGS II,LLC102
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
SUBJECT:Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 – Improvements and Guarantees – of the
Bozeman Municipal Code to Allow Greater Flexibility to Concurrently Construct
Improvements and Development Projects, Require Installation of Sidewalks
Commensurate with All Other Improvements to Provide Accessibility for Everyone,
and to Generally Clean up the BMC.
MEETING DATE:April 19, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Community Development - Legislative
RECOMMENDATION: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 21040 and move to recommend
approval of Ordinance 2074.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.2 High Quality Urban Approach: Continue to support high-quality planning,
ranging from building design to neighborhood layouts, while pursuing urban
approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation, infill, density,
connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
BACKGROUND:Update the City of Bozeman (City) regulations that ensure installation of
public and private improvements required for public health, safety, and
general welfare through the use of improvements agreements and financial
and non-financial sureties to guarantee installation of improvements. See
Appendix A for detailed description.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:1. Recommend denial of the ordinance based on findings of non-
compliance with the applicable criteria contained within the staff
report; or
2. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific
direction to staff to supply additional information or to address
specific items.
FISCAL EFFECTS:
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds
will be changed by this Amendment.
Attachments:
Div 38 270 PB Staff Report.pdf
103
Ordinance 2074 Div 38 270 Improvements and
Guarantees.pdf
07-13-20 City Commission Packet Materials - A5. Res 5179
Ordering Installation of Sidewalks.pdf
Report compiled on: April 13, 2021
104
Page 1 of 19
21040 Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment,
Ordinance 2074
Public Hearings: Zoning Commission – April 12, 2021.
Planning Board – April 19, 2021.
City Commission – May 11, 2021.
Project Description: Update the City of Bozeman (City) regulations that ensure installation
of public and private improvements required for public health, safety, and general
welfare through the use of improvements agreements and financial and non-financial
sureties to guarantee installation of improvements. See Appendix A for detailed
description.
Project Location: Revision to the text is applicable City-wide.
Recommendation: Meets standards for approval.
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 21040 and move to recommend approval
of Ordinance 2074.
Planning Board 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 21040 and move to recommend approval
of Ordinance 2074.
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 21040, and
move to provisionally adopt Ordinance 2074.
Report: April 13, 2021
Staff Contact: Kelley Rischke, Deputy City Attorney
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.
105
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 2 of 19
Unresolved Issues
None.
Project Summary
This proposal would entirely replace the improvements and guarantees regulations of the
Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) with new standards and procedures. These edits have
three components: requiring timely sidewalk installation for improved accessibility for
everyone; increased ability to concurrently construct infrastructure and development projects;
and general cleanup of the code.
First, in striking section 38.270.030.B.2, sidewalks will be installed within the timeframes
that all other required infrastructure is – within 1 year (or 2 years if concurrent construction is
permitted). The present allowance for delayed installation of sidewalks results in incomplete
sidewalk systems for up to three years and much longer than three years in some cases. This
change helps directly realize many of Bozeman’s stated goals in its 2020 Community Plan to
complete sidewalk networks to improve health of residents and be more inclusive and
accessible to people of all abilities including people who walk, people who use wheelchairs,
and those who use other non-vehicular means of transportation.
Upon completion of subdivision improvements and dedication of new lots via a final plat, the
City formally accepts infrastructure improvements and becomes responsible for operations
and maintenance of those improvements including streets. At the time of acceptance, the
subdivision infrastructure is considered complete, and the streets are opened to the public.
Essentially, the streets are no longer considered a construction zone, and contractors must
obtain an encroachment permit from the City Engineering Division for construction or
various activities within City right-of-way. If sidewalks are not constructed upon opening
streets to the public, the pedestrian mode of transportation is not viable at that time. While
builders generally prefer to delay sidewalk installation until after a home is constructed to
allow movement of equipment and materials on the site without potentially damaging the
sidewalk, there are reasonable and inexpensive methods to protect the sidewalk, such as
using a bridge wood plank, steel plate or placement of soil materials on top of the sidewalk
during construction.
Further, the detailed lot by lot tracking required by the current three year time horizon to
install sidewalks results in missing sidewalk segments, incomplete infrastructure, is
burdensome, and exceeds organizational capacity. This has been an on-going issue for many
years. The Bozeman Public Works Department has received 7 complaints over the past year
regarding missing sidewalk segments. Often the cost of installing sidewalks shifts to the
purchaser of the property or neighboring properties because the developer is no longer bound
by agreement or security to finish the sidewalk infrastructure.
106
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 3 of 19
By requiring sidewalk installation at subdivision, secured by an improvements agreement and
financial and non-financial guarantees, the City will ensure compliance with the code and
save resources. The process for the City to install incomplete sidewalks is burdensome and
includes: obtaining City Commission approval to order in sidewalks; legal work to determine
if there is any remaining applicable security and execute on it, if possible; communicate with
the lot owner that the sidewalks will be installed at their expense; hire a contractor to install
missing sidewalk segments; and track construction for a small improvements project. See the
attached July 13, 2020 City Commission packet for an recent example of the work required
to install sidewalks at the request and expense of home owners associations. Essentially,
there is substantially reduced efficiency associated with the higher cost of installing on-off
improvements when the sidewalks could be installed more efficiently with the subdivision
infrastructure.
Second, many edits address Bozeman’s changing development environment, recognizing that
new projects may increasingly contain a few large lots that will eventually go through
subsequent subdivision or development and, consequently, review and scrutiny of the City.
These edits provide more flexibility to allow concurrent construction of development projects
and required infrastructure, with an improvements agreement and appropriate financial and
non-financial sureties to ensure compliance with regulations and completion of the
infrastructure. Concurrent construction will no longer be solely available to planned unit
developments.
Finally, other proposed changes clean up the code, improving its functionality for the City
and applicants. These changes include: better organizing the contents of the division;
clarifying how, when, and the terms by which improvements agreements may be used;
clarifying the kinds of securities and the terms by which they may be used; and setting
necessary administrative procedures integrated with the City’s subdivision and zoning
development review procedures. To provide clarity and consistency across the Bozeman
Municipal Code, cross references are proposed to be added or changed. Additionally, the
term “security” is proposed to be used for consistency throughout the BMC, consistency with
Montana Code Annotated §76-3-507, and considering the definition of the term “security” in
Black’s Law Dictionary.
If the City Commission adopts this ordinance it will take effect 30 days after final adoption.
Strategic Plan
1.3 Public Agencies Collaboration
Foster successful collaboration with other public agencies and build on these successes.
2.2 Infrastructure Investments
Strategically invest in infrastructure as a mechanism to encourage economic
development.
107
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 4 of 19
3.1 Public Safety
Support high quality public safety programs, emergency preparedness, facilities, and
leadership.
3.3 Friendly Community
Ensure Bozeman continues to welcome diversity through policies and public awareness.
4.2 High Quality Urban Approach
Continue to support high-quality planning, ranging from building design to neighborhood
layouts, while pursuing urban approaches to issues such as multimodal transportation,
infill, density, connected trails and parks, and walkable neighborhoods.
4.3 Strategic Infrastructure Choices
Prioritize long-term investment and maintenance for existing and new infrastructure.
7.3 Best Practices, Creativity, & Foresight
c) Improve Departmental Collaboration – Identify opportunities to improve
collaboration between City departments and create subgroups on communications,
community interactions, long-range planning, and other matters of common concern.
7.5 Funding and Delivery of City Services
Use equitable and sustainable sources of funding for appropriate City services, and
deliver them in a lean and efficient manner.
Zoning Commission/Planning Board
The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. After
consideration of the application materials, staff report, and presentation a motion to
recommend approval passed unanimously. Primary issues of discussion by the Zoning
Commission were requirements related to stormwater systems and changes made to section
38.270.030.D. The video recording and minutes of the public hearing are available at
https://bozeman.granicus.com/player/clip/74?view_id=1&redirect=true. No public comment
was offered at the hearing.
The Bozeman Planning Board will hold a public hearing on April 19, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. using
WebEx.
No public comment has been received as of the writing of this report.
Alternatives
1. Recommend denial of the ordinance based on findings of non-compliance with the
applicable criteria contained within the staff report; or
108
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 5 of 19
2. Open and continue the public hearing on the application, with specific direction to staff to
supply additional information or to address specific items.
109
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 6 of 19
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................... 1
Unresolved Issues ............................................................................................................... 2
Project Summary ................................................................................................................. 2
Strategic Plan ...................................................................................................................... 3
Zoning Commission/Planning Board .................................................................................. 4
Alternatives ......................................................................................................................... 4
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS ........................................ 6
SECTION 2 - TEXT AMENDMENT STAFF ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS ....................... 7
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria ......................................................................... 7
Section 76-1-606, MCA (Effect of Growth Policy on Subdivision Regulations) ............ 12
Section 76-3-501, MCA (Subdivision Purposes)............................................................ 143
PROTEST NOTICE FOR ZONING AMENDMENTS ......................................................... 15
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND .............. 16
APPENDIX B - NOTICING AND PUBLIC COMMENT .................................................... 17
APPENDIX C - APPLICANT INFORMATION AND REVIEWING STAFF .................... 18
FISCAL EFFECTS ................................................................................................................. 18
ATTACHMENTS ................................................................................................................... 18
SECTION 1 - RECOMMENDATION AND FUTURE ACTIONS
Having considered the criteria established for a text amendment, the Staff recommends approval
as proposed.
The Zoning Commission held a public hearing on April 12, 2021 and the Planning Board will
hold a public hearing on this amendment on April 19, 2021.
The City Commission will hold a public hearing on the text amendment on May 11, 2021 at 6:00
p.m.
110
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 7 of 19
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. 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.
In considering the following criteria, the analysis must show that the amendment accomplishes
zoning criteria A-D. Zoning criteria E-K must be considered and may be found to be affirmative,
neutral, or negative. The Zoning Commission’s favorable decision on the proposed application
found that the application meets all of criteria A-D and that the positive outcomes of the
amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria E-K. The Planning Board must evaluate the
application against subdivision criteria 1-17. A favorable decision on the proposed application
must find that the positive outcomes of the amendment outweigh negative outcomes for criteria
1-17.
Section 76-2-304, MCA (Zoning) Criteria
A. Be in accordance with a growth policy.
Yes. The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP 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 on page 20 of the BCP 2020 include, “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.” Also, “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.” The proposed amendments provide for
public health, safety, and welfare of the community by providing clear standards and
administrative processes for development of critical infrastructure concurrently with new
residential or commercial development that will meet the needs of our growing city.
Theme 1, A Resilient City, states, “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.” The theme
includes several goals and objectives that apply to the proposed amendments:
111
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 8 of 19
Goal R-1: Continue to strengthen and develop resilience as a community.
R-1.5 Be robust: well-conceived, constructed, and managed systems.
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-2.5 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.
Providing greater flexibility in allowing concurrent construction of infrastructure and
development will potentially save time and money after a project has been approved,
bringing needed housing and innovative commercial developments to market faster.
Concurrent construction is currently permissible under the BMC only when a developer uses
a PUD. However, with a recent trend toward developing a few bigger lots that will
eventually go through further development process, the City can be more responsive to the
needs of developers by expanding the use of concurrent construction. Because the City will
have opportunities later to ensure compliance with regulations and timely installation of
infrastructure, bringing to bear non-financial security mechanisms in addition to financial
securities, the City ensures well-conceived and constructed projects. As individual homes
and similar low intensity development do not go through the same follow-up review
processes it is appropriate to limit ability for concurrent construction to more complex
projects.
Under Theme 2, A City of Unique Neighborhoods, Goal N-1 states, “support well-planned,
walkable neighborhoods.” Two specific goals apply to the proposed edits that would eliminate
delayed installation of sidewalks.
N-1.8 Install, replace, and maintain missing or damaged sidewalks, trails, and shared use
paths.
N-1.10 Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trail and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
112
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 9 of 19
Requiring sidewalks to be built commensurate with construction of other improvements and
development projects not only brings Bozeman into compliance with federal law, it also
supports connectivity and multi-modal transportation options for all of Bozeman’s citizens.
Theme 3, A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complementary Districts, notes “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.” Several important goals are squarely addressed by the proposed amendments.
Goal DCD-1: Support urban development within the City
DCD-1.7 Coordinate infrastructure construction, maintenance, and upgrades to support infill
development, reduce costs, and minimize disruption to the public.
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.
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.
Goal DCD-4: Implement a regulatory environment that supports the Community Plan goals.
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.
Developers with increasingly complex projects have requested the ability to concurrently
construct required infrastructure and their development projects without the requirement to use
the PUD process. The City can coordinate infrastructure development for these complex projects
to speed the delivery of development to residents and decrease costs for developers, while
maintaining a process of checks and balances to ensure completion of quality infrastructure.
Requiring construction of sidewalks concurrent with construction of development ensures
multimodal accessibility for all.
Under Theme 4, A City Influenced by Our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Lands, EPO-
3.2 states, “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.” The proposed changes would help to meet this objective by ensuring prompt
installation of sidewalk infrastructure.
113
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 10 of 19
Theme 5, A City That Prioritizes Accessibility and Mobility Choices, states, “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. . . . Appropriately designed trails, sidewalks, crossings,
bike lanes, and transit networks help us move around our neighborhoods and promote safe,
efficient passage to our destinations.” This theme is supported by the proposed amendments,
specifically by providing a thorough sidewalk network for multimodal transportation and a safe
space for travelers who chose not to use a motor vehicle. The following goals are supported:
Goal M-1: Ensure multimodal accessibility.
M-1.2 Make transportation investment decisions that recognize active transportation
modes and transit as a priority.
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-1.11 Prioritize and construct key sidewalk connections and enhancements.
No conflicts with the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 text have been identified.
The City has identified housing costs as a community issue and adopted a Community
Housing Action Plan with many implementing actions. The proposed amendment does not
directly advance the identified implementing actions. However, encouraging efficient
construction of both infrastructure and developments that include residential uses can lead to
decreased costs of construction, which may be passed on to home buyers. Additionally,
reducing the time to build residences will bring more housing options to the market faster to
address Bozeman’s housing shortage. Therefore, the proposed amendment advances the
purpose and intent of the Community Housing Action Plan.
The criterion is met.
B. Secure safety from fire and other dangers.
Yes. The proposed regulations do not change long standing provisions in the BMC that
specifically require developers who wish to engage in concurrent construction to maintain
fire hazard insurance and commercial general liability insurance, naming the City as an
additional insured. Incomplete sidewalks can be a hazard for trips and falls for all sidewalk
users. Ensuring completion of the sidewalk network lessens this hazard. The proposed
regulations do not alter safety standards such as building codes which work in concert with
zoning to protect safety.
The criterion is met.
114
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 11 of 19
C. Promote public health, public safety, and general welfare.
Yes. The proposed regulations provide standards and procedures that regulate the timing of
development of necessary infrastructure, such as sanitary sewer, water, stormwater, streets
and sidewalks in conjunction with development of commercial and residential projects. The
regulations seek to control the incremental delivery of infrastructure improvements
commensurate with incremental development to encourage adequate improvements for
health, safety and general welfare.
Additionally, sidewalks are an important element of the transportation system. The proposed
regulations are required to support public safety by ensuring a safe off-street space for non-
vehicular forms of transportation. Incomplete sidewalks do not allow the pedestrian element
of the transportation system to function as intended. Walking and other means of
transportation support public health by decreasing dependence vehicles that cause air
pollution from exhaust and encouraging an active lifestyle that has a myriad of personal
health benefits. Installation of sidewalks at subdivision also promotes the general welfare by
providing infrastructure that is inclusive to all citizens. As discussed under Criterion A, the
proposed amendments advance many established community priorities, which supports the
general welfare.
The criterion is met.
D. Facilitate the provision of transportation, water, sewerage, schools, parks
and other public requirements.
Yes. The proposed regulations change the timing of the installation of improvements
including streets, water, sewer, stormwater, and parks, but it does not alter existing standards
for these infrastructure requirements. The regulations facilitate and allow more flexibility for
the proposed development to install infrastructure at the same time as the development is
being built, while providing safeguards to the City to ensure the timing and quality of
infrastructure improvements will adequately meet the needs of the development and the City.
The criterion is met.
E. Reasonable provision of adequate light and air.
Neutral. The regulations do not directly impact whether a proposed development has
adequate provisions for light and air, but the amendments do recognize multiple points at
which the City can review the proposed development make provision for adequate light and
air. The amendment does not alter existing standards for setbacks, dedication of parkland, or
onsite open space which provide for light and air. The amendments do affect the installation
process for parks but not the ultimate designs or functionality after construction.
F. The effect on motorized and non-motorized transportation systems.
Yes. The proposed regulations will provide tighter controls to ensure needed transportation
infrastructure is installed to City standards. If a development qualifies for concurrent
115
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 12 of 19
construction, transportation infrastructure will be provided with the build out of the
development. Therefore, as buildings are finished and ready for use, the public streets and
sidewalks necessary to serve the development are also finished, or guaranteed to be finished
within a specific timeframe and funding to complete the infrastructure is secured.
The proposed regulations also greatly improve non-motorized transportation systems by
requiring completion of all sidewalk segments in a development, or phase of development,
which is vital to support pedestrian and wheelchair transportation.
The criterion is met.
G. Promotion of compatible urban growth.
Yes. The proposed amendments provide for land uses and permitting processes that ensure
concurrent development is compatible with the City’s policies and natural conditions. The
regulations do not disrupt existing standards for development that support managed,
thoughtful urban growth. Providing flexibility to allow concurrent construction of
infrastructure and buildings will bring much needed housing projects and commercial
development to the market faster, without sacrificing the required pubic infrastructure or its
quality. This facilitates compatibility as the community grows. The criterion is met.
H. Character of the district.
Neutral. The draft regulations do not modify the standards or infrastructure requirements of
any zoning district. The draft regulations do not modify the zoning map. Therefore, no analysis
of the individual districts or geographical layout of the individual districts is needed.
The need and requirements for streets, stormwater facilities, lighting, sidewalks, water and
sewer are present throughout the community and in all zoning districts. Regulations regarding
deferred installation of improvements through improvements agreements and the security
required to ensure compliance with the agreements are equally applicable in all zoning
districts. The character of any zoning district will not be degraded because the standards for
infrastructure improvement are not affected by the proposed regulations.
I. Peculiar suitability for particular uses.
Yes. While the section sets forth general requirements and terms for the use of improvements
agreements and security for them, the proposed revisions reserve concurrent construction to
certain circumstances where appropriate due to the complexity of the project and where there
are adequate controls exist to ensure completion of the infrastructure, such as further review
of the development and financial guarantees. The criterion is met.
J. Conserving the value of buildings.
Yes. Subject to limitations and requirements, the proposed regulations conserve or enhance
the value of buildings by reducing the time of development through concurrent construction
of infrastructure and buildings. Less time spent in constructing a development may reduce
116
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 13 of 19
the amount of interest developers pay on loans and bring projects to the market faster, which
may free up capital to fund other projects. The criterion is met.
K. Encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the jurisdictional
area.
Yes. The City has long prioritized higher density and multifunctional projects that meet the
needs of a growing city. The ability to reduce construction time through concurrent
construction of infrastructure and buildings suitable for more complex projects will likely
benefit those projects that propose higher density and diversity of uses. The criterion is met.
Section 76-1-606, MCA (Effect of Growth Policy on Subdivision Regulations)
1. Subdivision regulations adopted after a growth policy has been adopted must be
made in accordance with the growth policy.
Yes. The proposed amendments are made in accordance with the adopted growth policy - the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020. No conflicts with the goals and objectives of the Bozeman
Community Plan have been identified. An analysis of consistency with several policy
statements of the Community Plan and other adopted plan documents are found under Zoning
Criterion A, above. The criterion is met.
Section 76-3-102, MCA (Subdivision Purposes)
2. Promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by regulating the
subdivision of land.
Yes. The proposed regulations promote the public health, safety, and general welfare by
requiring prompt installation of sidewalks, which supports public health by providing
infrastructure to walk, bike or use other active forms of transportation. Sidewalks also
provide a safe space off of the street for multimodal transportation. The general welfare is
also promoted by providing infrastructure that is accessible to all citizens.
Further, the proposed edits regulate the timing of development of infrastructure necessary for
public health and safety, such as sanitary sewer, water, stormwater, streets and sidewalks in
conjunction with development of commercial and residential projects. See also Zoning
Criteria B and C. The criterion is met.
3. Prevent the overcrowding of land.
Neutral. Overcrowding is the condition arising from more intensity of use than the property
and infrastructure is capable of supporting. The proposed regulations make concurrent
construction more accessible to complex developments, which might generally apply to more
intense proposed uses. However, the proposed regulations do not address the underlying
analysis of whether a proposed land use is the appropriate intensity of use. The City’s
117
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 14 of 19
standards regarding appropriate intensity of use are not changed. The necessary
infrastructure to support development must still be provided in a timely manner.
4. Lessen congestion in the streets and highways.
Yes. The proposed amendments may lessen congestion in streets by shortening the time
period in which construction of infrastructure and buildings occurs that often require street or
sidewalk closures to accommodate construction. The criterion is met.
5. Provide adequate light, air, water supply, sewage disposal, parks and recreation
areas, ingress and egress, and other public improvements.
Yes. The regulations set forth a process by which a development ensures required water
supply, sanitary sewer, streets, stormwater, parks, and lighting are timely installed and
security is provided in case the developer fails to install required infrastructure.
The regulations have no impact on providing adequate light and air. See also Zoning Criteria
D and E. The criterion is met.
6. Require development in harmony with the natural environment.
Neutral. The proposed amendments do not specifically address this issue.
7. Protect the rights of property owners.
Yes. Article 2, Section 3 of the Montana Constitution recognizes that land owners have both
property rights and associated responsibilities. The proposed amendments protect the rights
of property owners by providing a uniform process and standards for installation of
infrastructure improvements. The regulations also propose allowing concurrent construction
in more instances than it was previously permissible. The regulations also require land
owners to be responsible for additional risks that may be present due to concurrent
construction by requiring the maintenance of appropriate insurance. The criterion is met.
8. Require uniform monumentation of land subdivisions and transferring interests
in real property by reference to a plat or certificate of survey.
Neutral. The proposed amendments do not address this issue.
Section 76-3-501, MCA (Subdivision Purposes)
This section requires local governments to adopt regulations that reasonably provide for:
9. Orderly development within the jurisdictional area.
Yes. The proposed amendments promote orderly development within the jurisdictional area
by providing a process and timeframes to complete necessary infrastructure. When
concurrent construction is appropriate, the requirements and safeguards in section
38.270.060.D ensure that infrastructure is installed along with phases of the development so
118
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 15 of 19
that buildings are supported by the streets, sewer, water, stormwater, lights and parks in an
orderly fashion. The criterion is met.
10. Coordination of roads within subdivided land with other roads, both existing
and planned.
Yes. The proposed amendments address coordination of roads within subdivided land with
other roads. In addition to financially guaranteeing street construction, non-financial
controls, such as withholding a building permit or certificate of occupancy when the
necessary infrastructure is not complete allow the City to coordinate the development of road
servicing the development with the overall street grid of the City, both existing and planned.
See also Zoning Criterion F. The criterion is met.
11. Dedication of land for roadways and for public utility easements.
Yes. In connection with the actual construction of infrastructure, the dedication of land and
required utility easements are also obtained through the process proposed in the amendments.
Both financial and non-financial securities serve to guarantee the transfer of rights of way
and easements before the development can be used. The criterion is met.
12. Improvement of roads.
Yes. As discussed above, the proposed amendments reasonably provide a process for the
timing of construction of streets and require adequate security to ensure performance by the
developer or the City if the developer defaults on obligations in the improvements agreement.
See also Zoning Criterion F. The criterion is met.
13. Provision of adequate open spaces for travel, light, air and recreation.
Neutral. The regulations have no impact on providing adequate light and air. The proposed
amendments will not alter the existing subdivision and zoning regulations which require the
provision of adequate open spaces; although the regulations do provide for the timing of and
surety for the installation of parks and open spaces.
14. Adequate transportation, water and drainage.
Yes. The proposed amendments reasonably provide for the completion of city streets, water,
sewer and storm drainage. City standards for the infrastructure is unchanged by the proposed
amendments. Rather, the developer must demonstrate compliance with City standards for all
infrastructure through an improvements agreement and adequate security. See also Zoning
Criteria D and F. The criterion is met.
15. Regulation of sanitary facilities, subject to section 76-3-511, MCA.
Yes. The proposed amendments ensure adequate sanitary facilities to serve the development
are installed in accordance with City standards. The proposed regulation sets forth the
process, timing, and security required for installation of infrastructure. See also Zoning
Criterion D. The criterion is met.
119
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 16 of 19
16. Avoidance or minimization of congestion.
Yes. Although not a specific purpose of the proposed amendments, they may lessen
congestion in streets by shortening the time period in which construction of infrastructure
and buildings occurs that often require street or sidewalk closures to accommodate
construction. The criterion is met.
17. Avoidance of subdivision which would involve unnecessary environmental
degradation and the avoidance of danger or injury to health, safety, or welfare by
reason of natural hazard or the lack of water, drainage, access, transportation, or other
public services or would necessitate an excessive expenditure of public funds for the
supply of such services.
Yes. The proposed regulation ensures that adequate water, drainage, street system,
sidewalks, and other necessary infrastructure will be installed to City standards by requiring a
contract (improvements agreement to perform the work) and guarantees, both financial and
non-financial, to ensure the improvements are installed.
The regulations will also help to avoid danger or injury to health, safety, and welfare by
requiring sidewalk installation at the time of development, or as soon as weather permits,
which: promotes health through active transportation; provides a safe space for pedestrian
and multimodal transportation; and allows citizens of all abilities to safely use the City’s
infrastructure. See also Zoning Criteria A, C, D, and F. The criterion is met.
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
120
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 17 of 19
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.
No protests have been received as of the writing of this report.
APPENDIX A - DETAILED PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND
BACKGROUND
Assuring the installation of infrastructure to support the safe and sanitary operation of
development is one of the most important functions of land development regulations; both those
mandated by the State and those locally established. When infrastructure is completed and ready
for use directly affects the ability for people to occupy and use buildings. For example, water and
sewer mains and connections must be complete to provide fire protection and enable use of
toilets. Coordination of infrastructure and building construction is complex and involves many
different parties, interests, and regulations.
The City has long provided alternatives for a developer to address these complex issues. As the
community continues to mature, it is appropriate to consider whether the existing processes still
meet community needs. The Staff has completed that evaluation and concludes some changes are
warranted. The scope of development has changed since 2004 when the regulations were last
materially updated. Today, it is more common to see large tracts being subdivided off and
prepared for subsequent site plan review. In 2004, it was more common to see individual lots
which only required a building permit.
Site plans allow a mechanism for the City to address coordination of installation of infrastructure
and onsite construction. Therefore, it is appropriate to enable a greater degree of flexibility at the
subdivision stage when site plans will be required for future development. It remains essential
that infrastructure be completed prior to use and occupancy of a site by the end user. An example
of this need is shown by the complaints the City receives regarding incomplete sidewalks.
Specific edits with these amendments are:
Replace all of Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) Division 38.270 – Improvements
and Guarantees – with new standards and procedures that provide more flexibility to
concurrently construct development projects and their required infrastructure while
still providing adequate security to the City that the improvements will be completed
in compliance with applicable laws and regulations;
121
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 18 of 19
Remove the requirement that a project must be a planned unit development in order
to qualify for concurrent construction and set forth when and under what terms a
development can proceed with concurrent construction;
Use the term “security” consistently in the code;
Ensure that improvements, as built, comply with the City’s design standards,
specifications, applicable laws and regulations by requiring an appropriate
professional to certify their compliance;
Removing the use of special improvements districts to guarantee street improvements
in section 38.270.030.B.1.b.(3);
Repeal the provision in section 38.270.030.B.2 allowing developments to delay the
installation of sidewalks for up to three years;
Include stormwater collection, treatment, and detention or retention systems as
required infrastructure that must be installed prior to issuance of a building permit;
Provide deadlines for completion of improvements;
Provide the method to determine the amount of a financial security and the
expiration of financial sureties;
Include a provision that the city may require a document be filed with the clerk and
recorder that clearly states a certificate of occupancy will not be issued until all
infrastructure is installed and accepted by the city, except in certain circumstances,
with conditions, and with adequate security is provided;
Require a property owners’ association to maintain stormwater facilities until the city
establishes a funding source and affirmatively accepts responsibility for
maintenance; and
Remove the requirement for property owners’ association to maintain parks because
the city has established a funding source and accepted responsibility for the
maintenance of parks.
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 and Planning Board
public hearing, and not more than 45 days prior to the City Commission public hearing. The
City exceeded the required notice provision. Hearing dates are on the first page of this report.
No written public comment has been received as of the writing of this report.
122
Staff Report for the Improvements and Guarantees Text Amendment 21040 Page 19 of 19
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: Kelley Rischke, Assistant City Attorney
FISCAL EFFECTS
No unusual fiscal effects have been identified. No presently budgeted funds will be changed
by this Amendment.
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 2074
July 13, 2020 City Commission packet materials
123
Page 1 of 24
ORDINANCE NO. 2074
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA REPEALING DIVISION 38.270 OF THE BOZEMAN MUNICIPAL CODE
AND REPLACING IT ENTIRELY WITH A REVISED DIVISION 38.270 TO: REMOVE
THE REQUIREMENT THAT A PROJECT BE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO
QUALIFY FOR CONCURRENT CONSTRUCTION AND ESTABLISH REGULATIONS
FOR CONCURRENT CONSTRUCTION; REVISE REGULATIONS FOR DEFERED
INSTALLATIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH AN IMPROVEMENTS
AGREEMENT AND FINANCIAL AND NON-FINANCIAL SECURITY; REMOVE
SECTION 38.270.030.B.1.b(3) ALLOWING DEVELOPMENTS TO DELAY
INSTALLATION OF SIDEWALKS; REQUIRE INSTALLATION OF STORMWATER
INFRASTRUCUTRE PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT; REQUIRE A
PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION TO MAINTAIN STORMWATER
IMPROVEMENTS; AND REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PROPERTY
OWNERS ASSOCIATION TO MAINTAIN PARKS; REQUIRE AN APPROPRIATE
PROFESSIONAL TO CERTIFY COMPLIANCE OF IMPROVEMENTS AS BUILT;
REMOVE THE USE OF SPECIAL IMPROVEMENTS DISTRICTS TO GUARANTEE
STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN SECTION 38.270.030.B; REQUIRE A DOCUMENT TO
BE FILED WITH THE CLERK AND RECORDER THAT STATES A CERTIFICATE OF
OCCUPANCY WILLNOT BE ISSUED UNTIL ALL INFRASTRUCTURE IS
INSTALLED AND ACCEPTED BY THE CITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
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
Montana Code Annotated § 76-2-304; and
124
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 2 of 24
WHEREAS, City is committed to reviewing and improving the Unified Development
Code (UDC); and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to regulate the provision of security requirements to
ensure construction of public improvements pursuant to Montana Code Annotated § 76-3-507; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized to require a subdivider to pay or guarantee payment
for the extension of capital facilities related to public health and safety, including public roads,
sewer, water, and storm drains pursuant to Montana Code Annotated § 76-3-510; and
WHEREAS, the City strives to prioritize accessibility and mobility choices by promoting
active transportation that increases daily physical activity, improving health and lowering
healthcare costs, and is inclusive of all users of transportation networks; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the City to allow concurrent construction of required
infrastructure and development, with an improvements agreement and appropriate security, to
promote economic development in the City and accommodate the changing development
environment; and
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of the City and public welfare to revise the Bozeman
Municipal Code (BMC) to increase the ease of use of the UDC;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA:
Section 1
Legislative Findings
The City Commission hereby makes the following findings in support of adoption of this
Ordinance:
1. The City has adopted land development and use standards to protect public health,
safety and welfare and otherwise execute the purposes of Montana Code Annotated § 76-2-304.
125
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 3 of 24
2. The City is authorized to regulate the provision of security requirements to ensure
construction of public improvements pursuant to Montana Code Annotated § 76-3-507.
3. The City is authorized to require a subdivider to pay or guarantee payment for the
extension of capital facilities related to public health and safety, including public roads, sewer,
water, and storm drains pursuant to Montana Code Annotated § 76-3-510.
4. A staff report analyzing the required criteria for a zone map amendment, including
accordance to the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, has found that the required criteria of
Montana Code Annotated sections 76-2-304, 76-1-606, and 76-3-501 are satisfied.
5. The City adopted a growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (BCP 2020),
by Resolution 5133 to establish policies for development of the community.
6. Zoning must be in accordance with the adopted growth policy.
7. The required public hearings were advertised as required in state law and municipal
code and all persons have had opportunity to review the applicable materials and provide
comment.
8. The City Commission considered the application materials, staff analysis and report,
Zoning Commission recommendation, Planning Board recommendation, all submitted public
comment, and all other relevant information.
9. The City Commission determines that, as set forth in the staff report and incorporating
the staff findings as part of their decision, the required criteria for approval of this ordinance
have been satisfied.
Section 2
That Bozeman Municipal Code Division 38.270 is repealed in its entirety.
Section 3
That Bozeman Municipal Code Division 38.270 is replaced with the following:
126
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 4 of 24
DIVISION 38.270. - IMPROVEMENTS AND SECURITIES
Sec. 38.270.010. - Purpose and applicability.
A. This division provides standards and procedures relating to the installation of physical
improvements and compliance with requirements related to development. As these
improvements are necessary to meet requirements of the law and to protect public health, safety
and general welfare and other purposes of this chapter it is also necessary to provide means by
which their installation can be ensured. Such improvements may include, but are not limited to,
design elements such as landscaping or architectural features; and infrastructure such as, parking
facilities, storm drainage facilities, pedestrian walkways and public utilities. Furthermore, in
some situations it is in the best interest of the person conducting development to be able to
provide security for the completion of certain work and be able to begin utilization of a
development sooner than would otherwise be possible if all improvements had to be physically
installed before use could begin. This article therefore protects the public health, safety, and
welfare and sources of public funding by:
1. Ensure completion of required improvements or compliance with other requirements of
development to an acceptable standard as required in state law or these regulations;
2. Provide a buyer or lessee protection while allowing a person undertaking development to
proceed with sales or leases before the project is totally complete, especially for multi-phased
projects;
3. Ensure adequate warranty or maintenance, when appropriate, of improvements;
4. Provide for mechanisms to ensure performance of or conformance with conditions of approval
or development requirements; and
5. Accomplish the purposes listed in this subsection A through mechanisms that reduce the need
to rely on costly litigation to accomplish those purposes.
B. This division applies to all subdivisions and site developments as follows:
1. Subdivisions must install or provide security for installation of improvements prior to final
platting as set forth in this article.
2. Site developments including all developments which are not subdivisions, must install
improvements or provide security for installation prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy or
as set forth in this article.
3. The city may determine the nature and timing of required installation of improvements as part
of the subdivision or site development process. When necessary to protect the health, safety, and
127
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 5 of 24
general welfare of the public, and ensure the function and viability of development, installation
of certain improvements may not be allowed to be delayed and must be installed before use of
the property or sale of the property.
Sec. 38.270.020. - Standards for improvements.
A. General. The developer must comply with the following procedures and standards for the
installation of development improvements, including parks.
1. Construction routes. For all developments, a construction route map must be provided
showing how materials and heavy equipment will travel to and from the site. The route must
avoid, where possible, local or minor collector streets or streets where construction traffic would
disrupt neighborhood residential character or pose a threat to public health and safety.
2. Protection of existing improvements. The developer, and the developer's contractors and
suppliers are jointly and severally responsible to ensure that existing improvements are not
damaged or rendered less useful by the operation of the developer, and the developer's
contractors or suppliers. Such protection of improvements may include requirements for cleaning
of vehicles leaving a construction site. This provision is intended to preclude damage to existing
roads, streets, water, sewer and drainage systems. The city may instruct the developer as to the
streets or roads to be used for access by construction equipment, and the developer must require
the same from the developer's contractors and their suppliers. The city may require the developer
to post a security to guarantee repair of damages.
B. Improvements to be dedicated to the public.
1. Plans and specifications. Engineering and survey plans, specifications and reports required in
connection with public improvements and other elements of the subdivision, or other
development required by the city, must be prepared by a registered engineer or a registered land
surveyor as applicable, licensed in the state, as their respective licensing laws allow. The plans
and specifications must be prepared in compliance with the city's design standards and
specifications policy, park design standards, and other regulations and policies, as applicable.
Plans and specifications for non-engineering improvements must be prepared by a person whose
qualifications are acceptable to the city department with responsibility for that type of
improvements. Plans and specifications for non-engineering improvements must be prepared in
compliance with any applicable adopted design standards and specifications policy.
2. Scope of work. The intent of these regulations is to provide standards by which the contractor
and the developer must execute their respective responsibilities and guarantee proper
construction and completion in every detail of the work in accordance with the plans,
specifications and terms set forth under these regulations.
128
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 6 of 24
a. The developer must furnish the plans, specifications and typical sections for approval by the
city.
b. The city may make or cause to be made any reasonable changes, alterations, amendments and
additions to the standard specifications for infrastructure or park improvements.
c. The city may require all work to be done to support the subdivision or site development,
including off-site improvements.
3. Control of work. During the course of construction, and at the completion of each phase of a
project, the developer's registered civil engineer, or other person acceptable to the city, must
submit a statement that the improvements have been inspected and found to have been
constructed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. Prior to making any
changes, the developer's engineer must notify and receive written approval or disapproval from
the city for any changes in approved plans and specifications.
4. Improvement procedure.
a. Approval of the improvement plans and specifications must be completed before installation
of improvements or entering into an agreement where security is to be provided for the
completion of the improvements.
b. The procedure for submittal, review and approval of improvement plans and specifications is
contained in the city's design standards and specifications policy, and must be followed by the
developer and the developer's contractors. All plans and specifications related to park and public
trail improvements must be submitted to the parks division for review and approval.
c. After the preliminary plat has received approval or conditional approval, and before the final
plat is submitted, the developer must either install the required improvements or enter into an
agreement with the city securing the installation and performance of the improvements.
d. After the final site plan is approved, subject to section 38.270.030, and prior to occupancy of
any buildings, the developer must either install the required improvements or enter into an
agreement with the city securing the installation and performance of the improvements.
5. Sanitary facilities. Water supply, sewage disposal and solid waste disposal systems must meet
the minimum standards of the city and the state department of environmental quality as required
by MCA 76-4-101 through 76-4-135, and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, and are subject
to the approval of the city.
C. Private improvements. Improvements must be constructed as shown on the approved final site
plan, final plat, or plans and specifications, as applicable. The developer is responsible for
coordinating installation with all necessary parties and to restore to its original condition any
129
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 7 of 24
public improvements or any private improvements or property damaged during installation of
improvements.
Sec. 38.270.030. - Completion of improvements.
A. General. The applicant must provide certification by the architect, landscape architect,
engineer or other applicable professional that all improvements to be dedicated to the public
were installed in accordance with the approved site plan, plans and specifications, or plat as
applicable. For required private improvements, the applicant must provide certification by the
architect, landscape architect, engineer or other applicable professional that all improvements,
including, but not limited to, landscaping, ADA accessibility requirements, private infrastructure,
or other required elements were installed in accordance with the approved site plan, plans and
specifications, or plat as applicable, unless a waiver of certification in whole or part is explicitly
approved by the DRC.
1. Improvements to be dedicated to the public. Improvements to be dedicated to the public, such
as water mains, sewer mains, parkland and related improvements, and public streets, must be:
a. installed by the developer in accordance with the approved plans and specifications;
b. certified by a registered professional civil engineer, licensed in the state, or other appropriate
professional acceptable to the city;
c. accepted by the city prior to the approval of the final plat, building permit, issuance of a
certificate of occupancy or other identified benchmark as appropriate.
2. Record drawings and project certification complying with the city's design standards and
specifications policy, including timing for submittal of materials, must be provided by a civil
engineer licensed in the state, or other appropriate professional acceptable to the city prior to
final plat approval for subdivisions, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or release of security
associated with the improvements to be dedicated to the public.
3. As-built drawings complying with the city's design standards and specifications policy,
including timing for submittal of materials, must be provided prior to final plat approval for
subdivisions, issuance of a certificate of occupancy, or release of security associated with the
improvements to be dedicated to the public.
a. Public street or road improvements must be developed to adopted city standards.
4. Public right of way lighting. Lighting, as required in division 38.570 must be incorporated into
all development. Prior to final plat approval, lighting must be installed or secured. If the lighting
is secured, it must be considered as part of the required street improvements and building permits
must not be issued until the improvements are installed, except when concurrent construction is
130
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 8 of 24
an identified purpose of the initial project review, and approved pursuant to the criteria
established in subsection D of this section.
5. Private improvements and other required improvements. Improvements, including, but not
limited to, private parks or open space, landscaping, paving or irrigation must be installed in
accordance with the approved preliminary plat or site plan by the developer and inspected and
found to comply with the city standards and requirements prior to the approval of the final plat,
issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building or site, or other identified benchmark as
appropriate. All improvements required as part of a subdivision must be installed and accepted,
or secured in accordance with an improvements agreement, prior to final plat approval.
B. Completion time for subdivisions.
1. Improvements. All subdivision improvements, including parks, must be constructed and
completed as approved by the city.
a. All improvements must be installed prior to the issuance of a building permit for any lot within
a subdivision except, when concurrent construction is an identified purpose of the initial project
review, and approved pursuant to the criteria established in subsection D of this section.
b. The subdivider must meet one of the following requirements for completion of street
improvements. The option must be specified in the preliminary plat submittal. Should the
applicant not identify which option is desired, the option presented in subsection B.1.b.(1) of this
section must be required. Altering the choice of option after approval of the development
constitutes a material modification to the project and requires re-review of the project for
modification to the approval subject to the provisions of section 38.100.070.
(1) The subdivision streets improvements must be installed prior to final plat approval. This
requirement may be modified by the review authority for streets where dictated by
circumstances, such as cold weather conditions that do not permit paving, and where acceptable
security for the ultimate development of the streets is provided. However, under no
circumstances must the required gravel courses, curbs, gutters, or sidewalks be waived, and
sanitary sewer manhole rims and water valve boxes must be located at a grade that will not be
damaged by traffic. This requirement must generally not be modified for non-residential
developments; or
(2) The subdivider must enter into an improvements agreement guaranteeing the completion of
the paving, curb, gutter, storm drainage, street lighting, sidewalks, or other street infrastructure
improvements not yet completed. The improvements agreement must provide security, as
explained in this division. However, at a minimum, the plans and specifications for the street
improvements must be approved by the review authority prior to final plat approval. Building
permits will not be issued until the street improvements are completed and accepted by the city
131
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 9 of 24
except when concurrent construction is an identified purpose of the initial project review, and
approved pursuant to the criteria established in subsection D of this section.
C. Completion time for site development. Whenever any building lots and/or building sites are
created inside the city limits, and prior to the issuance of any building permits on such lots or
sites, municipal water distribution systems, municipal sanitary sewer collection systems, streets,
and stormwater collection, treatment, and detention or retention systems must be provided to the
site. Each building site must utilize and be connected to both the municipal water distribution
and municipal sanitary sewer collection systems. Subject to the provisions of subsection C.1 of
this section, these improvements must be designed, constructed and installed according to the
standards and criteria as adopted by the city and approved by the review authority prior to the
issuance of any building permits. Except where concurrent construction is identified and
approved pursuant to criteria established in subsection D below.
1. Provision of municipal central water distribution, municipal sanitary sewer collection systems,
streets, and stormwater systems means that the criteria in either subsection a or subsections b and
c are met as follows:
a. Water, sewer, stormwater, and street services are installed and accepted by the city with
service stubs being extended into the site, with such stubs being of adequate size to provide
water and sewer service to the proposed development without modification to publicly owned
infrastructure; or
b. The water mains, sewer mains, stormwater system, and streets to be extended to provide
service to the development are: located within a publicly dedicated right-of-way or easement;
constructed to city standards; are physically adjacent to the site proposed for construction; are
installed and accepted by the city; and are adequate in capacity to provide necessary service to
the proposed development; and comply with the requirements of this subsection C.1.b and
subsection C.1.c of this section;
c. Water mains, sewer mains, stormwater system, and streets must meet the following
requirements:
(1) Any required on-site extensions of water mains, sewer mains, stormwater system, or streets
to be dedicated to the public must be located entirely within publicly held easements or rights-of-
way; must serve only a single lot; are the subject of an irrevocable offer of dedication to the city
upon completion of the project; the development is under the control of a single developer who
must retain control of the entire project until final completion; all work is under the supervision
of a single general contractor; and no subdivision of land is involved;
(2) The DRC must determine when the standards of this subsection C.1 are met. The fire
department must consider whether adequate fire protection services are available from existing
hydrants, and water supply exists to meet needs during construction. If adequate fire protection
132
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 10 of 24
does not exist then concurrent infrastructure and building construction may only occur under the
provisions of subsection C.1.c.(3) of this section. Based on evaluation by the fire department,
simultaneous construction of infrastructure to be dedicated to the public and private construction
may be permitted only within a defined portion of the site;
(3) Approval of the final engineering design, including location and grade, for the infrastructure
project must be obtained from the engineering department, and the state department of
environmental quality when applicable, prior to issuance of any building permit for the
development; and
(4) No occupancy may be issued until all on-site and offsite water, sewer, stormwater, and street
or drive improvements necessary to serve the site are installed and accepted or approved as
applicable by the city.
D. Exception for Concurrent Construction. In certain circumstances, the issuance of a building
permit may be allowed prior to completion of the public infrastructure, provided that the
following criteria are met:
1. The city will have an opportunity to review and approve future proposed development through
a site plan review or planned unit development;
2. The person undertaking the development must enter into an improvements agreement to
ensure the installation of required infrastructure and other applicable improvements, to be
secured by any security or securities found in 38.270.080. If a financial security is used, the
amount will be determined by the city and in an amount not less than 150 percent of the cost of
the improvements verified against city publicly bid unit prices, where such are available. The
security must be in the name of the city and must be at least six months longer than the time of
performance required by the improvements agreement;
3. Improvements must be complete within two years of the date of the improvements agreement;
4. Approval of the final engineering design, including location and grade, for any public
infrastructure must be obtained from the engineering department, and the state department of
environmental quality when applicable, prior to issuance of any building permit for the
development;
5. Building permits may be issued incrementally, dependent upon the status of installation of the
infrastructure improvements. All building construction within the development must cease until
required phases of infrastructure improvements as described in the improvements agreement
have been completed, and inspected and accepted by the city;
6. The developer must provide and maintain hazard and commercial general liability insurance.
Insurance policies must not be cancelled without at least 45 days prior notice to the city. The
133
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 11 of 24
commercial general liability policy must name the city as an additional insured. The developer
must furnish evidence, satisfactory to the city, of all such policies and the effective dates thereof;
7. The developer must recognize, acknowledge and assume the increased risk of loss because
certain public services do not exist at the site;
8. If public funds or other third party funding will be used to fund all or part of the installation of
infrastructure, the developer must enter into an agreement with the city which identifies
predetermined infrastructure funding options, including, but not limited to, reimbursement,
payment up front, creation of a special improvements district, or grants;
9. No occupancy of any structures or commencement of any use constructed or proposed within
the boundaries of the development will be allowed until required infrastructure improvements
have been completed, and inspected and accepted by the city, and a certificate of occupancy has
been issued;
a. No occupancy of structures or commencement of any use is allowed when such action would
constitute a safety hazard in the opinion of the city;
10. The developer must enter into an agreement with the city to address the provision of any
services on an interim basis during construction, if deemed appropriate;
11.The developer must execute a hold harmless and indemnification agreement indemnifying,
defending and holding harmless the city, its employees, agents and assigns from and against any
and all liabilities, loss, claims, causes of action, judgments and damages resulting from or arising
out of the issuance of a building permit under this section;
12. The developer must pay for any extraordinary costs associated with the project which the city
may identify, including, but not limited to, additional staff hours to oversee the planning,
engineering and construction of the project and infrastructure improvements, inspection of the
infrastructure improvements and any extraordinary administrative costs;
13. The development must be under the control of a single developer and all work must be under
the supervision of a single general contractor. The developer and general contractor must agree
that there must be no third-party builders until required infrastructure improvements have been
completed, and inspected and accepted by the city; and
14. Subsequent to preliminary plat or plan approval, a concurrent construction plan, addressing
all requirements of this section, must be submitted for review and approval of the Community
Development Director in consultation with the City Engineer and with a recommendation from
the development review committee.
E. Limitations. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection D of this section, the city may limit
the scope, type and number of projects eligible for concurrent construction consideration.
134
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 12 of 24
Sec. 38.270.040. - Special provisions for timing of certain improvements.
A. Park, pathway, and boulevard improvements.
1. These required improvements must be installed, or subject to an approved improvements
agreement and financially secured, prior to final plat approval or occupancy of a building subject
to development review, excluding sketch plans.
2. Due to seasonal considerations, building and occupancy permits may be issued prior to
installation of these improvements as long as the improvements are subject to an approved
improvements agreement and are financially secured.
B. Neighborhood center improvements.
1. With the exception of neighborhood commercial and civic buildings and their grounds,
neighborhood center improvements must be installed, or subject to an approved improvements
agreement and financially secured, prior to final plat approval.
2. Due to seasonal considerations, building and occupancy permits may be issued prior to
installation of improvements related to greens, plazas and squares as long as the improvements
are subject to an approved improvements agreement and are financially secured.
Sec. 38.270.050. - Acceptance of improvements.
A. Improvements dedicated to the public.
1. Acceptance of street, road, and bridge improvements. Before any subdivision street, whether
new or existing, can be accepted into the city street system by the city, it must be built to meet or
exceed the required standards. Any improvements made to county roads must meet or exceed
standards set by the county road office, and must be reviewed and approved by the county road
office. Any bridge improvement, within the city or the county, must meet or exceed standards set
by the state department of transportation and county road office, and must be reviewed and
approved by the county road office and the city, and accepted by the county road office into the
county's bridge maintenance system.
2. Acceptance of park, water, sewer, and storm drainage improvements. Before any public park,
water, sewer or storm drainage improvement, whether new or existing, can be accepted into the
city system by the city, it must be built to meet or exceed the required standards. Any
improvement must meet or exceed standards set by the city, state department of environmental
quality and county road office, as appropriate. Improvements must be reviewed and approved by
the city and other agency, as applicable.
135
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 13 of 24
3. Record drawings. Record drawings and project certification that all public infrastructure
improvements comply with the city’s design standards and specifications policy must be
provided by a civil engineer licensed in the state of Montana and must be submitted prior to final
plat approval for subdivisions, per section 24.183.1107(5)(f), ARM as may be amended, or prior
to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for site development, or other identified benchmark as
appropriate.
4. The city may require verification that all liens have been released and payments made prior to
accepting dedication of improvements.
B. Private improvements. The city or its agent must conduct an "as-built" inspection to verify
compliance and must sign off on a certificate of occupancy, final plat or other conclusory action
if all terms and details of the approval are complied with. Except as provided in section
38.270.060, no final plat approval can be permitted, or certificate of occupancy issued, unless the
terms and details of an approved plat or site development or sketch plan are met. Prior to
receiving a certificate of occupancy, the developer must certify the completion of the
improvements as required in section 38.270.030.A.
Sec. 38.270.060. - Improvements agreements.
A. Improvements agreement required. All improvements necessary or required to meet the
standards of this chapter or conditions of approval must be the subject of an improvements
agreement and be secured if final plat approval, occupancy of buildings or other use of an
approved development is allowed before the improvements are completed and inspected by the
city.
1. Reservation. The city reserves the right to require actual installation of improvements prior to
occupancy when such improvements are necessary to provide for health, safety and welfare or
adequate function of systems or on-site development.
B. When required.
1. When occupancy of a development subject to zoning review will commence prior to
completion of all required site improvements; or
2. When a subdivision is to be granted final plat approval prior to the completion of all required
improvements, the applicant must enter into an improvements agreement with the city.
3. At the discretion of the community development director, certain projects receiving a
certificate of appropriateness may be required to enter into an improvements agreement with the
city at the time of final approval of the certificate of appropriateness.
136
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 14 of 24
C. If an improvements agreement is used to guarantee the completion of required improvements,
including infrastructure, it may allow for the staged installation of improvements in defined areas
and in accordance with an approved time schedule. At the city's discretion, the improvements in
a prior increment may be required to be completed or the payment or security for costs of the
improvements incurred in a prior increment must be satisfied before development of future
increments.
1. If an improvements agreement is used with a final subdivision plat to secure infrastructure
improvements, a separate document must be filed with the clerk and recorder with the final plat
that clearly states that building permits will not be issued until all water, sewer, storm drainage
infrastructure and streets are installed and accepted by the city. This requirement may be
modified by the city for streets where dictated by circumstances, and where acceptable
improvement security for the ultimate development of the streets is provided. However, under no
circumstances must the required gravel courses, curbs, gutters, or sidewalks be waived. No
building permits will be issued for a subdivision within the city until all required water, sewer,
storm drainage, required street lighting, and street gravel courses are installed and accepted
except when concurrent construction is an identified purpose of the initial project review, and
approved pursuant to the criteria established in section 38.270.030.D.
2. If an improvements agreement is used with a site development to secure infrastructure
improvements, a separate document must be filed with the clerk and recorder that clearly states
that certificate of occupancy will not be issued until all water, sewer, stormwater systems and
streets are installed and accepted by the city. This requirement may be modified by the city for
streets where dictated by circumstances, and where acceptable improvement security for the
ultimate development of the required infrastructure is provided. However, under no
circumstances can the required gravel courses, curbs, gutters, or sidewalks be waived. No
building permit will be issued for a site development until all required water, sewer, storm
drainage, required street lighting and street gravel courses are installed and accepted by the city,
except when concurrent construction is an identified purpose of the initial project review and
approved pursuant to the criteria established in section 38.270.030.D.
D. Standards for improvements agreements.
1. All agreements. All improvements agreements must meet the following standards:
a. The agreement and security must be satisfactory to the city attorney as to form and manner of
execution;
b. Detailed cost estimates and construction plans of all required on-site and off-site
improvements must be made a part of the agreement;
137
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 15 of 24
c. Provide for security in the amount equal to 150 percent of the estimated cost of the
improvements verified against city publicly bid unit prices, where such are available, to be
secured if the agreement is to be activated;
d. The term for the security referenced in subsection C.1.c of this section must be at least six
months longer than the time of performance required by the improvements agreement;
e. The agreement must provide for the city to claim the security by certifying that the developer
is in default of the performance to be secured;
f. Requests for partial release of security must only be in amounts such that the security will
always equal 150 percent of the value of the remaining uncompleted work, and such that not
more than 90 percent of the security is released prior to completion of all improvements. The city
may take into account the location and scope of development phases in evaluating requests to
reduce the amount of a financial security. The city may require verification that all liens have
been released and payments made prior to releasing a portion of the security;
g. Provide for the city to require a replacement security in the event the issuer of the security
becomes insolvent, enters receivership, or otherwise gives cause for the city to lack confidence in
the ability of the issuer to honor the security;
h. Permit the city in the event of default by the developer to include in the costs to be recovered
from the security those costs resulting from the need to call in the security, including but not
limited to costs for the city attorney's time; and
i. The financial security must be placed in the keeping of the city.
2. Subdivisions. Improvements agreements for subdivisions must meet the following standards in
addition to those listed in subsection C.1 of this section:
a. The length of time of the agreement must not exceed one year from the date of final plat
approval unless explicitly included as a term of the agreement and the security remains in force.
The agreement must stipulate the time schedule the subdivider proposes and the city accepts for
completing the required improvements;
b. The estimated cost of improvements must be provided by the subdivider's professional
engineer and be consistent with publicly bid unit pricing where such are available. The city
engineer has the discretion to require a second estimate of the cost of improvements, with the
cost of obtaining the second estimate borne by the subdivider. The agreement must stipulate
which type of security arrangements will be used;
c. Security for improvements for internal subdivision streets, water, storm drainage and sewer
mains, or other internal or external improvements must be reduced only upon recommendation of
138
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 16 of 24
the city department with responsibility for the type of infrastructure which has been guaranteed;
and
3. Site development. Improvements agreements for developments other than subdivisions must
meet the following standards in addition to those listed in subsection C.1 of this section:
a. If occupancy of the structure or commencement of the use is to occur prior to installation of
the required improvements, the installation of those improvements must be secured in
conformance with the requirements of this division 38.270;
b. All secured improvements must be completed by the developer within nine months of
occupancy or the security must be forfeited to the city for the purpose of installing or contracting
for the installation of the required improvements;
c. At the community development director's discretion, a developer may be permitted to extend
the manner of security, in general for a period not to exceed one additional year. Factors
including, but not limited to, progress of installation achieved to date and phasing of projects
may be considered;
d. The city must determine which, if any, of the required improvements must be installed prior to
occupancy, regardless of the use of an improvements agreement and security. Such
determination must be based on a finding that unsafe or hazardous conditions will be created or
perpetuated without the installation of certain improvements or that the property will have an
unacceptable adverse impact on adjoining properties until such improvements are installed;
(1) Items include but are not limited to walkways and signage necessary for ADA compliance,
parking surfaces adequate to meet the needs of the uses to be conducted during the term of the
improvements agreement, or matters related to life safety are required to be installed prior to any
occupancy; and
e. When all provisions are met for occupancy of a facility or commencement of a use prior to the
installation of all improvements, and adequate security has been provided in accordance with the
terms of an improvements agreement, the building official may issue a certificate of occupancy.
E. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the city may limit the scope, type and number
of improvements eligible for being secured by an improvements agreement and require
installation prior to final plat approval, issuance of building permits, occupancy or other similar
actions.
F. The community development director must sign improvements agreements on behalf of the
city.
139
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 17 of 24
G. When an improvements agreement is used to allow the filing of a final plat prior to the
completion of infrastructure, a notice of improvements agreement must be recorded along with
the plat which indicates that certain infrastructure work is still not complete and identifying that
work. When the work has been completed and is accepted by the city as complete, the city must
record a notice of completion stating that the work that was the subject of the improvements
agreement is complete.
Sec. 38.270.070. - Payment for extension of capital facilities.
A. The city may require a subdivider or other site developer to mitigate the impacts of
subdivision or site development by the extension of existing capital facilities or the construction
of new capital facilities. The review authority, established in section 38.200.010, may determine
that the payment or the guarantee of payment for the construction of capital facilities are
appropriate measures to coordinate with the city's planned capital facility improvements and to
ensure public health, safety and welfare. Payment of cash in-lieu of constructing capital facilities
by a subdivider or other site developer to the city is a mechanism for meeting regulatory
requirements and mitigating subdivision and other site development impacts. The review
authority, in its sole discretion, must determine the appropriate mitigation for any subdivision or
site development impacts.
B. The city may require a subdivider or other site developer to pay or guarantee payment for part
or all of the costs of extending capital facilities related to public health and safety, including but
not limited to public roads or streets, sewer mains, water supply mains and stormwater facilities
for a subdivision or other site development. The costs must reasonably reflect the expected
impacts directly attributable to the subdivision or other site development. The city may not
require a subdivider or other site developer to pay or guarantee payment for part or all of the
costs of constructing or extending capital facilities related to education.
C. The review authority may accept direct payment of cash in-lieu of public street, water, sewer,
and stormwater capital facilities required by this code. For process and standards for payment for
park mitigation see 38.420.030. Should the review authority approve a request to pay cash in-
lieu, a subdivider or other site developer is not required to obtain a variance from the
requirement that such facilities be constructed prior to development approval. A request to meet
the terms of chapters 38 and 40 by payment of cash in-lieu must be submitted by an applicant
prior to a determination of adequacy or any advisory body recommendation during review of a
development application. The city may choose to require payment of cash rather than require the
construction of capital facilities as determined by the review authority. A request received after
determination of adequacy or advisory body recommendation is a material modification to the
application and requires re-review and determination of adequacy.
140
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 18 of 24
1. The review authority, established in section 38.200.010, must evaluate proposals of cash in-
lieu of capital facilities and make a decision to approve, approve with conditions or deny such
requests. In evaluating a request to pay cash in-lieu, the review authority must consider the
following criteria:
a. Whether there is a danger to public health and safety of accepting cash in-lieu rather than
constructing the capital facilities;
b. Whether the work described in the proposal is part of a project scheduled for commencement
of construction on the most recently adopted capital improvement plan no later than three years
from the date of submittal;
c. Whether a public work is pending which would substantially damage the work otherwise
required to be constructed;
d. Whether the installation of the otherwise required capital facilities would be disruptive to
planned public improvements;
e. Whether the city has made a determination of the reasonableness of the cost estimate of the
work; and
f. Whether the payment would enable a more efficient installation of required capital facilities.
2. The request to pay cash in-lieu of capital facilities and the findings of the review authority
must be considered in any final action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a
development application.
3. All cash paid in-lieu must be held by the city in a fund dedicated to the work for which the
monies are paid.
4. As a condition of accepting cash in-lieu, the city may require the property owner to execute a
waiver of right to protest creation of a special improvement district, or other legal instrument,
assuring participation, on a fair share, proportionate basis, in future capital facility improvements
in the vicinity of the development proposal.
5. The city manager may adopt procedures by administrative order to implement this section.
6. The cash paid must include all component costs of the work deferred including but not limited
to design, permitting, traffic management, construction, and record drawings. The cash paid must
include a contingency amount to offset the uncertainty of cost estimating and potential escalation
of costs.
7. Issuance of a refund is a material modification of a development per section 38.100.070.
Refunds of cash paid in-lieu are not available if:
141
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 19 of 24
a. A final plat which relied upon cash-in-lieu of facilities has been recorded;
b. If building permits for a non-subdivision development have been issued; or
c. If the city has published an invitation to bid on work which relies upon the paid cash for
project funding.
Sec. 38.270.080. - Types of acceptable securities.
A. Financial securities. A variety of means of providing for the security of improvements
agreements, ensuring adequate maintenance of required improvements and ensuring compliance
with conditions of approval for various developments may be allowed. One or more of the
following instruments may be used to provide a financial security for improvements to be
completed. The method, terms and amount of security must be acceptable to the city. Financial
security is the primary method to provide security for installation of physical improvements.
1. Direct payment of cash to the city;
2. Irrevocable letters of credit satisfactory to the city attorney as to form and manner of
execution;
3. Cash escrows held by the city, or held by an approved escrow agent and subject to an executed
escrow agreement; or
4. Completion bonds satisfactory to the city attorney as to form and manner of execution.
B. Nonfinancial securities. In addition to the possible financial securities listed above, the
following nonfinancial securities may be used to ensure compliance with conditions of approval,
ensure maintenance of required improvements and coordinate timing of development. When
deemed appropriate, the city may use nonfinancial security methods in combination with a
financial security method.
1. Granting of final permits;
2. Sequential approval of multi-phased projects, with subsequent phases prohibited from
receiving approval until prior approved phases have complied with all requirements;
3. Formation of a special improvement or maintenance district. This method must not be
considered completed until after all final actions have occurred and the district is in existence
and the bonds sold;
4. Establishment of a property owners' association with duties to maintain certain improvements
that must be enforceable by the city;
142
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 20 of 24
5. Irrevocable offer of dedication of improvements to be dedicated to the public after completion
of the project; and
6. Recording of a special restrictive covenant or deed restriction which may only be released by
written agreement of the city.
Sec. 38.270.090. - Development or maintenance of common areas and facilities by developer or
property owners' association.
A. General. For the purposes of this section, "common areas and facilities" include:
1. Public and private parkland;
2. Boulevard strips in public rights-of-way along external subdivision streets and adjacent to
parks or open space;
3. Common open space (as defined in section 38.700.040);
4. Neighborhood centers (except for neighborhood commercial and civic uses and their grounds)
as set forth in section 38.410.020;
5. Pathways (as defined in section 38.700.150);
6. Lighting;
7. Stormwater facilities, and
8. Irrigation facilities installed in common areas.
B. Development. If common areas or facilities will be developed by a subdivider or by a property
owners' association, a development plan must be submitted with the preliminary plat application
for review and approval. The development plan must be reviewed and approved by the city prior
to the installation of improvements in common areas or the installation of common facilities. An
approved park master plan satisfies this requirement.
1. Landscaping. When landscaping and/or irrigation systems will be installed in parkland,
boulevard strips or common open space, the development plan must be accompanied by a
landscaping plan that was prepared by a qualified landscaping professional. When landscaping in
common areas is installed by the subdivider, the subdivider must warrant these improvements
against any and all defects for a period of two years from the date of installation of the
landscaping. When landscaping in a park is installed by the subdivider, the subdivider must
comply with the parks design standards and warrant these improvements against any and all
defects for a period of two years from the date of installation of the landscaping.
143
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 21 of 24
2. Tree permits. If trees will be planted in dedicated city parkland or boulevard strips, tree
planting permits must be obtained from the forestry department.
C. Maintenance. When common areas or facilities will be maintained by the subdivider or by a
property owners' association, a maintenance plan that complies with section 38.220.320 must be
submitted with the preliminary plat application for review and approval. The maintenance plan
must include a maintenance schedule, and a mechanism to assess and enforce the common
expenses for the common area or facility. The maintenance plan must be included in the
subdivision covenants. The developer must provide all necessary maintenance until the
improvements are transferred to a property owners' association, or other final custodian, at which
point the property owners' association or other final custodian will be responsible for all
necessary maintenance of common areas or facilities identified in the maintenance plan.
Maintenance must be provided by the property owners' association for stormwater facilities, with
the exception of storm sewer mains, inlets, and manholes located in public streets, until the city
establishes a stormwater maintenance district or other dedicated funding source and affirmatively
accepts responsibility for maintenance. The provisions of sections 38.220.300—38.220.320
apply to this section.
1. Landscaping warranty. The maintenance plan must provide that any required or proposed
landscaping must be maintained in a healthy, growing condition at all times, and that any plant
that dies must be replaced with another living plant that complies with the approved landscape
plan.
2. Irrigation system warranty. The maintenance plan must provide that any required or proposed
irrigation system must be maintained in an appropriate and efficient manner and kept in good
operating condition, and that any components of the irrigation system that break must be fixed
and replaced if necessary with components approved in the irrigation system design plan.
3. Shade tree maintenance. The forestry division must be responsible for the trimming, removal,
or similar maintenance of shade trees in all city rights-of-way and on city-maintained property,
including parks.
D. Maintenance Area. For a multiphase project with common areas and facilities, the
maintenance mechanism must include all phases of the project, and must be created for the entire
project with the first phase. No property must be removed from the maintenance area or
mechanism without prior approval by the city to ensure continued maintenance of common areas
and facilities, and on-going fulfillment of all obligations.
Sec. 38.270.100. - Warranty.
A. Publicly dedicated
144
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 22 of 24
All publicly dedicated improvements must be subject to a warranty of duration and scope to meet
the city's design standards and specifications manual and park design standards as applicable.
B. Private improvements
If an improvements agreement is entered to guarantee installation of private improvements, the
improvements must be subject to a warranty of not less than one year from the date of
installation.
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.
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
145
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 23 of 24
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 Sections 1-3.
Section 8
Effective Date.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after final adoption.
146
Ordinance 2074, Repeal and Replace Division 38.270 of the Bozeman Municipal Code
Page 24 of 24
PROVISIONALLY ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, on first reading at a regular session held on the ___ day of ________, 20__.
____________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
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
____________________, 20__. The effective date of this ordinance is ______________, 20__.
_________________________________
CYNTHIA L. ANDRUS
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
MIKE MAAS
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN
City Attorney
147
Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission FROM: Kellen Gamradt, Engineer II
Shawn Kohtz, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Conduct a public hearing and having considered public testimony, move to approve Commission Resolution 5179 ordering the installation of sidewalks along portions of streets in and along Baxter Meadows West
Subdivision and The Legends II Subdivision.
MEETING DATE: July 13, 2020 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action
RECOMMENDATION: Conduct public hearing; approve Commission Resolution No. 5179 SUGGESTED MOTION: Having conducted a public hearing, and considered written and spoken public testimony, I hereby move to approve Commission Resolution No. 5179.
BACKGROUND: The Homeowner Associations of Baxter Meadows West Subdivision and The Legends II Subdivision have requested that the city take the necessary actions to complete the installation of sidewalks along the streets in these neighborhoods. These subdivisions had plat conditions that required the installation of sidewalks within three years of the recording of
the plat. Staff has contacted the owners of lots in these phases that do not yet have sidewalks
installed and advised them that if sidewalk installation is not initiated by July 1, 2020, the city will cause the sidewalks to be installed at their expense. In Baxter Meadows West, Phase 3B there are currently 3 out of 65 lots that do not have
sidewalks. In the Legends 2 Subdivision, Phase 3, there are currently 3 out of 54 lots that do not
have sidewalks. The attached exhibit maps show the areas where sidewalks are currently lacking. On June 8, 2020, Commission Resolution No. 5178 was approved by the City Commission,
which indicated it was the Commission’s intent to order sidewalks along certain streets as
148 148
specified in the Resolution, and to authorize that notice be given to affected property owners of
said intention. Commission Resolution No. 5179 (attached) has been prepared which if approved would order sidewalks to be installed as specified in the Resolution of Intent.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None identified
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: The cost of sidewalk installations would be borne by the
adjoining property owners. If sidewalk installations need to be completed by a city contractor,
staff time will be needed for contract administration and subsequent billing activities.
Attachments: Commission Resolution No. 5179
Proposed sidewalk installations exhibit maps
Report compiled on June 10, 2020
149 149
Page 1 of 2
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5179
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOZEMAN,
MONTANA, ORDERING THAT SIDEWALKS BE INSTALLED IN CERTAIN AREAS
OF BOZEMAN OF AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTIONS 7-14-4109 AND 7-14-4110,
MONTANA CODE ANNOTATED.
WHEREAS, Section 7-14-4109, Montana Code Annotated, provides that a local
governing body may order sidewalks constructed in front of any lot or parcel of land; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission did, on the 8th day of June 2020 adopt Commission
Resolution No. 5178, stating its intent to order in sidewalks along specified streets within the
City of Bozeman; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission did, after due and legal notice, on the 13th day of
July 2020 conduct a public hearing on its intent to order in sidewalks.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Commission of the City of
Bozeman, Montana:
Section 1
That in accordance with the provisions of Section 7-14-4109, Montana Code Annotated,
and Section 38.39.030 B. 2. b, Bozeman Municipal Code, and to protect the public interest and
safety of the pedestrians of the City of Bozeman, sidewalks are hereby ordered to be installed on
both sides of the street unless otherwise noted as follows:
1. Andalusian Avenue between Kimberwicke Street & McCafferty Street
2. Thoroughbred Lane between Kimberwicke Street & McCafferty Street
3. Boylan Road between Midfield Street & Richau Lane
4. Blackfeet Lane between Boylan Road & the unnamed alley to the south
150 150
Resolution 5179, (Baxter Meadows West & The Legends II Sidewalks)
Page 2 of 2
Section 2
That, pursuant to Section 7-14-4109(3), written notice was mailed to every owner or
agent of the owner, and to any purchaser under contract for deed of such property, notifying
them that the owner is required to construct a City-standard sidewalk in front of their lot or
parcel of land and, if they fail or neglect to install said sidewalk by July 1, 2020, or within thirty
(30) days of the date of the written notice, whichever is the latter, the City may construct or
cause to be constructed the sidewalk and will assess them the cost thereof, including engineering
costs and costs enumerated in Sections 7-12-4121 and 7-12-4169, Montana Code Annotated,
against the property in front of which the sidewalk was constructed.
Section 3
That the City Clerk shall enter this resolution upon the minutes of the City
Commission.
PASSED AND APPROVED by the City Commission of the City of Bozeman,
Montana, at a regular session thereof held on the 13th day of July, 2020.
___________________________________ Chris Mehl Mayor ATTEST:
________________________________________ Mike Maas City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
GREG SULLIVAN City Attorney
151 151
152 152
153153
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Marty Matsen, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:Introduction to subdivision review process in the City of Bozeman.
MEETING DATE:April 19, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:As determined by the Board.
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.
BACKGROUND:The purpose of this memo and initial presentation is to provide a general
framework of state statutes relating to subdivision regulations and
subdivision review in the City of Bozeman. The intent is provide a summary
overview of the proc3ess, how the Growth Policy influences each step, and
describe the steps involved in the subdivision process. Any feedback and
questions the discussion generates will inform future conversations and
content.
Montana defines a subdivision as a, “division of land or land so divided that
it creates one or more parcels containing less than 160 acres that cannot be
described as a one-quarter aliquot part of a United States government
section, exclusive of public roadways…” 76-3-103 Mont. Code Ann. The term
includes land used for condominiums, RV spaces, and in some cases mobile
home sites or properties for rent or lease. Montana first adopted statewide
process and regulations for subdivision in 1973 by passing the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act (Platting Act) largely as a consumer protection
act.
The Platting Act created a framework for review and minimum regulations
and public participation for subdivisions. The Platting Act is the only land use
regulation the State requires of all local governments. Based on this
framework Bozeman has adopted regulations and processes to administer
state requirements. Specific standards that relate to subdivision design are
based on the Growth Policy (Community Plan), PROST, Water and Sewer
facility plans, Transportation Plan, and other related plans.
The purpose of subdivision regulations are to ensure public safety,
154
environmental health, balance needs of property rights and legacy land use,
and adopt uniform Monumentation and land transfer standards. These are
more fully described in Mont. Code Ann. sections 76-3-102, statement of
Purpose, 76-3-501 Local subdivision regulations, and 76-3-504, local
subdivision regulations.
In Montana subdivisions are defined as major or minor based on the number
of lots being created. Major subdivisions are those with six or more lots and
minor subdivisions consist of five lots or less. Further subdivision of an
existing lot that was created through the subdivision process is considered a
subsequent subdivision and may be a minor or major subdivision.
For all intents and purpose there are no differences between a minor and
major subdivision, except for the required public hearings. The governing
body has the discretion, in part, to delegate who has the authority to review
certain subdivisions. Review authority is detailed in section 38.200.010,
BMC.
Bozeman’s review procedures are described in section 38.240.110, BMC.
Currently, the City divides subdivision review into three discrete phases as is
required in state law:
1. Pre-application review. Pre-application plan review is to discuss this
chapter and these standards, to familiarize the developer with the
standards, goals and objectives of applicable plans, regulations and
ordinances, and to discuss the proposed subdivision as it relates to
these matters. This is the stage of review where a subdivider may
request and be approved to provide less than the full documentation
with the preliminary plat. This section explicitly state a developer may
have the Planning Board review the pre-application plan pursuant to
section 38.240.110.A.3.b, BMC. No public notice is given at this step.
2. Preliminary Plat. The Preliminary Plat is the formal review of the
application by affected agencies, includes public hearing(s), and
concludes with the decision of approval, denial, or approval with
conditions. This is the stage where the Planning Board has an explicitly
assigned role in state law. The Planning Board has delegated to Staff
its review of minor subdivisions. The time available for public review of
a subdivision varies based on the number of lots in the subdivision.
Public notice is required during this step and the City Commission
makes the final decision.
3. Final Plat. Final plat is the final step to ensure all conditions of
approval have been met, allows for finically guaranteeing certain
required infrastructure, and requires City Commission review and
approval. No public notice is given at this step. When the final plat is
filed with the Gallatin County Clerk and Recorder the new lots are
legally created and may be sold.
Anticipating the discussion on subdivision review process we have attached
155
examples of the information we typically receive for each phase described
above. These include a Pre-App map, a preliminary plat, and the final plat.
The City does not name subdivisions, that’s left to the developer. However,
minor subdivisions are assigned a number by the Clerk & Recorder when
they are finally filed to create the lots.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:As determined by the Board
FISCAL EFFECTS:Not identified
Attachments:
1.0 Pre-Application Plat.pdf
4.3 Preliminary Plat Map_08-18-2017.pdf
Final Plat Page 1 05-24-2019.pdf
Report compiled on: April 14, 2021
156
RENEE WAYBLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)157
BLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)158
159
Δ
Δ BLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)160
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
FROM:Tom Rogers, Senior Planner
Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT:Fifth work session to define and refine Planning Board goals for 2020 and
implementation of the Bozeman Community Plan 2020. The initial discussion
took place on December 21, 2020 and the second work session took place
on March 1, 2021. And April 5, 2021
MEETING DATE:April 19, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Citizen Advisory Board/Commission
RECOMMENDATION:As determined by the Board.
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.
BACKGROUND:On December 21, 2020 the Planning Board initiated discussion on the Board
priorities and goals for the coming year including implementation of the
Community Plan 2020. A follow up discussion occurred on March 1, 2021.
Chairman Happel prepared summary memorandums based on each
discussion and are attached to the report.
Implementation of any initiative is dependent on its relationship to other
plans and City goals and financial resources to support the initiative. The
Board indicated interest in preparing a budget proposal to submit to the City
Manager for consideration. There was also discussion on cost related to a
number of ideas including a speaker series, public outreach and
engagement, and Board member education. The attached Budget Concepts
memo provides a basis for discussion regarding forwarding a budget request.
Planning Board priorities must be in harmony with other City and regional
goals and objectives. These are established in adopted plans of the City and
specifically for 2021 in Resolution 5257. The Bozeman Community Plan
explicitly acknowledges 26 other adopted plans; each of which integrate and
function in relation with one another. In addition, the City’s success is
dependent on our regional aspirations some of which are detailed in the
Gallatin County Triangle Community Plan. A link to the Triangle Plan was
provided in previous packets.
161
Considerable discussion concerning availability of documents relating to the
function of the Planning Board was discussed at the March 1, 2021 Meeting.
In an effort to remind and provide Board members the resources available
to them the City Clerk directs you to the following resources. These are
available to all members of the public.
Education on City documents:
1. Go to the City of Bozeman Home page.
https://www.bozeman.net/home
2. Hover your cursor over the “I Want To…” icon in the upper right
corner of the home page.
3. Click “document center” under the View heading.
4. Documents and document subject matter are organized
alphabetically. You are welcome to peruse anything here of interest.
However, notable subject areas you may be interested in are:
a. City Advisory Board Information
b. City Planning Board
c. Ordinances
d. Resolutions
Chairman Happel suggested an additional task the Board ought to pursue
was review and recommendation on existing subarea plans and their relation
to the new Bozeman Community Plan 2020. Most Community Development
reports and plans are listed under the “Community Plans, Documents and
Reports” section of the Community Development web site.
https://www.bozeman.net/government/planning/community-plans-
documents-reports
Three plans appear to be ripe for review.
1. Bozeman Deaconess Health Service Subarea Plan
2. Design and Connectivity Plan for North 7th Avenue Corridor
3. Bozeman Creek Neighborhood Plan
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None
ALTERNATIVES:As determined by the Board
FISCAL EFFECTS:Not identified at this time.
Attachments:
Memo to PB-210412.pdf
Report compiled on: April 14, 2021
162
MEMORANDUM
TO: Bozeman Planning Board Members
FROM: Henry Happel
SUBJECT: Fifth Working Session on Goals and Objectives
DATE: April 13, 2021
This memorandum is in two parts. The first part sets forth the results of our
second through fourth work sessions on Planning Board goals and objectives. In order to
both keep a running record of our activities and decisions, and to facilitate our ability to
focus on topics currently under discussion, I have highlighted the language that has been
added to this Memo as a result of our fourth work session on April 5. We will continue
our discussion of Better Communication of Beliefs and Intentions. See the highlighted
language below.
The second part sets forth all of the major proposals, organized by topic, made
during our first work session on December 21. I intend that this second part of the
Memorandum, as before, serve as the overall agenda for our continuing discussion on
goals and objectives.
PART I- RESULTS OF PRIOR WORK SESSIONS:
Concerning A Better Educated Board:
The following two resolutions were passed at our March 1 meeting:
RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board seeks a properly educated board. In furtherance of this,
the City should:
1. Select diverse board members with experience and training relevant to the Board’s
overall duties.
2. Provide appropriate initial training to new Board members.
3. Provide on-going training and educational opportunities to all Board members through
memberships in the American Planning Association and occasional informal work
sessions with senior members of the Community Development Department.
Provide reasonable financial resources so that the Board may from time to time have
outside speakers present to it on topics of particular interest.
163
2
RESOLVED:
1.That the Planning Board should take reasonable actions to help ensure that all Board
appointees meet the experience standards required by MCA 76.1.224(a).
2. The City Commission representative on the Planning Board should remind Board
members of Board openings. Board members are encouraged to make citizens aware of
these openings.
3. The City should promptly inform all Planning Board members of citizen applications
for open positions as received, and of the content of these applications. Board members
are encouraged to make their views on the various applicants known to the City
Commission representative on the Planning Board.
4. The Director of Community Development and the Chairman of the Planning Board
should be consulted by the City Commission representative on the Planning Board
concerning their views on all applicants.
Concerning Improved Mechanics for Board Meetings:
The Board agreed at our March 1 meeting that it would experiment with a revised
procedure whereby a matter before the Board would be discussed first, to be followed by
a motion concerning the matter, rather than, as has been the case, a motion followed by
discussion.
At our March 15 meeting, Mr. Happel presented a short document entitled Some
Suggestions for the Conduct of Efficient Meetings. The suggestions contained therein
were informally but unanimously approved by the Board. Among these (suggestion #5
for Board Members) is a suggestion implementing the revised order for the discussion
and motioning of a matter under consideration.
Concerning Better Community Outreach:
Ms. Costakis and Mr. Pape met with Melody Mileur and Dani Hess to discuss and
recommend specific proposals for better communication to the public and better
engagement with the public concerning the the activities of the Planning Board. The
results are incorporated in a Memo to the Planning Board from them dated April 7. I will
circulate a copy of the Memo to the Board. Ms. Costakis has a business conflict and will
not be able to attend our April 19 Board meeting. I anticipate that Community Outreach
and this Memo will be discussed at our May 3 meeting assuming time permits.
Concerning Coordination with Other Advisory Boards:
Ms. Madgic has agreed to make arrangements for a joint Planning Board/Zoning
Commission meeting to discuss the Growth Policy and related matters.
Mr. Happel is waiting on a green light from City management to set up a Zoom
conference with the chairpersons of other Boards whose activities are relevant to the
activities of this Board. This matter has become at least tangentially entangled in the
City’s consideration of a substantial consolidation of citizen advisory boards.
164
3
Concerning Better Communication of Beliefs and Intentions:
The discussion by the Planning Board at our April 5 meeting focused on three issues
broadly relating to this topic.
1. Should the Planning Board, or rather a subcommittee of the Planning Board, meet with
applicants early on in the application process to provide feedback to the developer
concerning the Board’s view of the project?
The Board conducted a discussion of this proposal. Several Board members with prior
experience with this sort of arrangement spoke in favor of it. One member suggested that
the subcommittee should be composed of representatives from several citizen advisory
boards. Other board members were skeptical of the value of this approach. No decision
was made on this matter.
Ms. Madgic and Mr. Rudnicki, who had met with Community Development to discuss
the current review process utilized by the City, strongly recommended that the Planning
Board have Messrs. Rogers and Saunders provide an overview of the process the City
utilizes to review and approve major subdivision projects that come before the Board.
This suggestion met with the unanimous approval of the Board and is now scheduled to
be an item on the Board’s agenda for its April 19 meeting.
2. Should developers provide a narrative to the City at the beginning of the application
process stating why their proposed development would be of benefit to the city?
After discussion, the Board unanimously passed a motion that the Board explore a
simplified avenue for applicants to communicate in writing to the Board and the City
what the applicant believes will be the benefit of their project to the City.
This matter will also be subject to further discussion after the overview presentation by
Messrs. Rogers and Saunders. The City currently encourages applicants to provide a
narrative of their proposed project in the Application Cover Sheet for each project but it
does not directly focus on benefits to the City.
3. Should the Planning Board attempt to identify significant provisions of the UDC that
are inconsistent with the new growth policy and encourage the City to amend these to
bring them into conformance?
The Rudnicki/Madgic Memo suggested that perhaps the Planning Board should identify a
few key areas in which the current UDC and zoning code are inconsistent with the new
Growth Policy. The Memo contained a list of some of these possible areas. After
discussion, the Board unanimously passed a motion in support of this effort, which
motion requested that each member of the Board give due consideration to areas meeting
this criteria. These are to be discussed by the Board at our next available opportunity.
165
4
PART II- FIRST WORK SESSION LIST OF IDEAS TO DISCUSS:
PROPOSALS CONCERNING PROCESS:
Better Educated Board:
Select Board members with training and experience relevant to planning.
Provide planning-related training to all Board members.
Have experts with relevant knowledge speak to the Board on topics of interest
(example: form-based codes vs. alternatives). Make an effort to invite the public and
inform them as to the relevance and timing of these presentations.
Arrange for more meetings with and input from the Director of Community
Development.
Ensure that every Board member that wants one has an APA membership.
Pursue the possibility of the Board having their own pot of funding.
Improved Mechanics for Board Meetings:
The City should provide technological means for Board motions to be reduced to
text and made available to all Board members and other participants as they are made.
Board meetings should proceed with a discussion of the matter under
consideration followed by a motion, rather than a motion followed by a discussion.
Board meetings should proceed with better control over the time allocated to
speakers.
Better Community Outreach:
The Board should undertake or at least support community outreach on the new
Growth Policy.
The Board should determine ways to obtain more and better public opinion on
planning issues, including soliciting the views of different interest groups, different
neighborhoods, and different demographics.
Better Communication of Beliefs and Intentions:
The Board should proactively advise the City and interested private parties,
particularly developers, in advance concerning its views on relevant topics such as
housing mix, density, and multi-modal transportation. Maybe we consider a preliminary
meeting where developers show us their project early in the process and we can let them
know if we see concerns? If we do this I would suggest a strict time limit so we don’t
overload meetings or push real business for preliminary business.
Coordination with Other Advisory Boards:
The Board should be better informed concerning the goals being pursued by other
citizen advisory boards that affect our work and we should seek better coordination
among us.
166
5
Community Plan:
After receiving the required annual report from Community Development on
actions taken to achieve the goals and objectives of the Community Plan, the Board each
year should have a public meeting to review the Plan and determine whether to suggest
any amendments to it.
The Board should periodically review metrics, both those described in the
Community Plan and others as available, to track progress under the Plan and assess if
each metric is providing the right data for informed decision making or should be revised.
Regional Coordination:
We should be looking at how our Board will evolve/change once we become a
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). Should we be more thoughtful about how
our decisions affect the region as a whole? Should we coordinate more with other
jurisdictions? What are the most strategic areas where we can make the most progress
especially in light of the new County Commission?
Subdivision Review:
Staff Reports on proposed subdivisions should address how the development will
fit in with existing and anticipated future developments in the City and describe why it is
believed that the development will serve the community well over the long term. The
Board should always address this issue in subdivision reviews.
Staff Reports should describe the context surrounding the proposed development
application. They should also describe the major matters of contention, including major
resolved matters, between the Department and the developer and within the Department
concerning the proposed development.
To the extent permitted by the City Attorney’s office, Community Development
should shorten Staff Reports by eliminating or at least reducing boilerplate and pro forma
provisions.
PROPOSALS CONCERNING SUBSTANCE:
Unified Development Code:
The UDC should be further revised if not re-written.
The City’s tentative plan to hire a consultant to do an audit of the current Code
should be dropped in favor of hiring professional assistance to do a full re-write of the
Code.
The Board’s role should be limited to determining if the proposed revised Code is
consistent with the Community Plan.
The Board should participate in the UDC Community Platform discussions.
The Board should promote changes to the existing Code that could be agreed to
now since the timeline for a total rewrite will be years.
Density:
The Board should push for increased housing density.
167
6
Housing Mix:
The Board should push for an integrated mix of housing in new and established
developments wherever possible.
Housing Affordability:
The Board should promote policies that will help deal with the affordable housing
problem afflicting the City.
Equity:
We should have an “equity lens” when we look at various projects to ensure that
disparities (health, income, environmental, social, etc.) are not being exacerbated but
ameliorated.
Transportation:
The Board should be vigilant about transportation decisions made by the City.
The Board should coordinate with the Transportation Coordinating Committee on
transportation issues.
The Board should push for increased funding for multi-modal transportation
projects and increased connectivity within projects.
The Board should push for a rewrite of our Complete Streets Policy.
Parking:
The Board should weigh in on the parking issues facing the City.
Fiscal Impacts:
The Board should encourage the City to evaluate developments based on
balancing the long-term fiscal impacts of infrastructure maintenance and other services
such as police and fire with the citizens’ ability to absorb property and other tax
increases. There is a fiscal impact of various development patterns (sprawl vs. compact)
and this should be considered when we approve subdivisions, large transportation
projects, and our codes.
City Resources:
The Board should encourage the City to find and devote more financial resources
to the City’s Department of Community Development, its Building Division, and the
Engineering Department.
Existing Neighborhood Plans:
As explained in Chris Saunder’s Memo to the Planning Board of December 16,
2020, neighborhood plans must be consistent with the Growth Policy. The Board should
therefor review the existing neighborhood plans for consistency, and if inconsistent,
either update or rescind these. We should agree on a mechanism for accomplishing this
task.
168