HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-03-21 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 01-21-20, 02-04-20, 2-18-20 and 04-19-21(Happel)
E.Public Comment
Please state your name and address in an audible tone of voice for the record.This is the time for
THE PLANNING BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
PB AGENDA
Monday, May 3, 2021
WebEx Meeting Information
Via Webex:
https://cityofbozeman.webex.com/cityofbozeman/onstage/g.php?
MTID=e16290a432950e37cf775c83eae0d7642
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: 182 447 3299
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, May 3rd, 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.
1
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
F.1 Introduction to subdivision review process in the City of Bozeman.(Rogers)
G.Action Items
G.1 Fifth work session to define and refine Planning Board goals for 2020 and implementation of
the Bozeman Community Plan 2020.(Happel)
H.FYI/Discussion
I.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
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).
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Planning Board
FROM:Taylor Chambers - Community Development Technician II
SUBJECT:Minutes Approval for 01-21-20, 02-04-20, 2-18-20 and 04-19-21
MEETING DATE:May 3, 2021
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Suggested Motion:
I move to approve the meeting minutes from January 21st, 2020
I move to approve the meeting minutes from February 4th, 2020
I move to approve the meeting minutes from February 18th, 2020
I move to approve the meeting minutes from April 19th, 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:
01-21-20 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
02-04-20 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
02-18-20 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
04-19-21 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
Report compiled on: April 22, 2021
3
City Planning Board
Tuesday, January 21, 2020 | 7:00 PM | City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 07:28:22 PM (00:00:07) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call
Present were:
Mark Egge
Lauren Waterton
Paul Spitler
Chris Mehl
Henry Happel
George Thompson
Cathy Costakis
Jennifer Madgic
Jerry Pape
B. 07:28:53 PM (00:00:38) Changes to the Agenda – Chairman Happel announced that Action Item 1 – The
Nest Preliminary Plat was postponed to a future meeting and would not be considered at the current
meeting.
07:29:44 PM (00:01:29) Mayor Mehl gave an FYI to the board stating that four appointees will be expiring in the
following month.
07:30:39 PM (00:02:24) Board member Waterton voiced that she will not be seeking re-appointment.
C. Minutes for Approval (None)
D. 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. Action Items
1. The Nest Preliminary Plat #19373 (Rosenberg) – Postponed to a future meeting
Application requesting a proposed subdivision consisting of 13 lots on 5.4 acres in the Westbrook
Subdivision. Located west of Rosa Way and between Annie St. and Durston.
19373 Staff Report
19373 Documents
19373 Additional Documents
19373 Trail and Sidewalk
19373 Plans
2. 07:32:22 PM (00:04:07) Growth Policy Future Land Use Map - Continuation of Public Hearing
4
Planning Board memo – 01.21.2020
Planning Board edits from Version 1 12.2019 hearing
Planning Board edits from Version 1 01.2020 hearing
FLUM GP Comments 1.8.20
FLUM GP Comments Map 1.8.20
Public Comment-S. Custer 1.9.20
J. Madgic Comment 1.13.20
Revised Land Use Categories to Zoning 01.15.20
Draft Bozeman Community Plan V8
Draft Bozeman Community Plan Appendices
07:33:55 PM (00:05:40) Chairman Happel directed board members to Chapter 4: Implementation
07:34:35 PM (00:06:20) Board Discussion
07:35:49 PM (00:07:34) Motion: That the first paragraph of the implementation section should be altered to
talk more generally about growth policy implementation, you can site statute that talks about the need for
subdivision and zoning regulations and other regulations to be made in accordance with the growth policy.
Jennifer Madgic.
07:36:26 PM (00:08:11) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
07:37:33 PM (00:09:18) Vote on the motion: Motion carries 8-0 (Board member Pape was not present for
the vote)
07:37:54 PM (00:09:39) Motion: Comment was received from Western Transportation Institute where they
suggested that on page 50 under the short term action list that the goal/objective should be referenced for
each item. Mark Egge.
07:38:14 PM (00:09:59) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
07:40:08 PM (00:11:53) Vote on the Motion: Motion carried 8-0 (Board member Pape was not present for
the vote)
07:40:19 PM (00:12:04) Motion: To adopt the alternative language recommended in the comments from
Western Transportation Institute. Cathy Costakis.
07:40:31 PM (00:12:16) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
07:41:07 PM (00:12:52) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 8-0 (Board member Pape was not present for
the vote)
5
07:44:38 PM (00:16:23) Motion: To add a short term action item, maybe under monitoring and updates, to
provide a baseline and targets. Cathy Costakis.
07:44:52 PM (00:16:37) Motion Seconded: Jennifer Madgic
07:44:54 PM (00:16:39) Board Discussion
07:46:39 PM (00:18:24) Staff Comment: Strategic Services Director, John Henderson provided clarification to
the board on the achievability of the various implementation goal targets.
07:59:44 PM (00:31:29) Motion: To investigate the determination of appropriate up zoning on a
generational or other time based basis that is done in conjunction with the Zoning Commission and Planning
Staff so that the growth policy reflects the awareness of the importance of this future methodology for
increasing density gradually and thereby hoping to affect affordability: Jerry Pape
08:00:16 PM (00:32:01) Motion Seconded: Jennifer Madgic
08:00:32 PM (00:32:17) Friendly Amendment: To modify the motion to say: “implement” instead of
“investigate.” Jerry Pape
08:07:05 PM (00:38:50) Friendly Amendment: To change the wording of the first section to reflect what has
been already started with the affordable housing plan and then take that back into the goals: Cathy Costakis
08:07:36 PM (00:39:21) Friendly Amendment Accepted: Jerry Pape
08:08:40 PM (00:40:25) Vote on the motion: motion carried 9-0
08:08:51 PM (00:40:36) Chairman Happel directed Board members to page 51: Indicators
08:12:10 PM (00:43:55) Motion: To gather the information from the real estate multiple listing system to
indicate some aspects of the stock, not just what’s available, but what it costs. Jerry Pape
08:14:11 PM (00:45:56) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
08:14:17 PM (00:46:02) Vote on the motion: motion carried 9-0
08:19:08 PM (00:50:53) Motion: That the board provide indication to the city commission and to the
planning staff that budgetary constraints should be regarded and should be supported in the new tasks that
are being created with visiting the metrics portion of the new community plan that the board is making:
Jerry Pape
08:19:39 PM (00:51:24) Motion Seconded: Lauren Waterton
6
08:23:43 PM (00:55:28) Motion Rescinded: Jerry Pape
08:24:20 PM (00:56:05) Motion: To change the source for the indicator for bike accessibility from the
bicycle advisory board to City GIS: Mark Egge
08:24:35 PM (00:56:20) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
08:24:54 PM (00:56:39) Vote on the Motion: motion carried 9-0
08:25:24 PM (00:57:09) Motion: To change percentage of resident’s households within walking distance to
open space or trails under Park Accessibility to a quarter mile: Cathy Costakis
08:25:46 PM (00:57:31) Motion Seconded: Mark Egge
08:26:06 PM (00:57:51) Vote on the Motion: Motion carried 9-0
08:26:25 PM (00:58:10) Chairman Happel directed board members to Chapter 3 and the public comments
that were received.
08:26:57 PM (00:58:42) Staff liaison Rogers guided the board through the public comments that were
received.
08:49:40 PM (01:21:25) Motion: To consider residential mixed use for area 4002 along College street:
George Thompson
08:49:56 PM (01:21:41) Motion Seconded: Jerry Pape
08:50:59 PM (01:22:44) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 9-0
08:52:21 PM (01:24:06) Public Comment Opportunity
08:52:26 PM (01:24:11) Ryan Krueger of Intrinsik Architecture requested zoning changes for two parcels.
09:04:13 PM (01:35:58) Motion: To choose Request 1, Option 1 with regard to the industrial plan category as
indicated by Intrinsik and as explained by Planner Saunders with respect to an absence of unintended
consequences: Jerry Pape
09:04:29 PM (01:36:14) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
09:04:35 PM (01:36:20) Board Discussion
7
09:11:13 PM (01:42:58) Vote on the motion: Motion failed 5-4
09:11:54 PM (01:43:39) Architect Ryan Krueger gave an additional public comment regarding B-1 Zoning.
09:14:36 PM (01:46:21) Motion: To approve the change to the table suggested by the applicant: Chris Mehl
09:14:42 PM (01:46:27) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
09:14:47 PM (01:46:32) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 9-0
09:15:02 PM (01:46:47) Chairman Happel directed board members to Chapter 2
09:15:45 PM (01:47:30) Motion: To adopt the suggested language changes provided by Commissioner
Madgic: Mark Egge
09:15:52 PM (01:47:37) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
09:15:54 PM (01:47:39) Board Discussion
09:21:08 PM (01:52:53) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 8-0
09:21:28 PM (01:53:13) Chairman Happel directed board members to Chapter 5: Amendments and Review
09:21:43 PM (01:53:28) Board Discussion
09:28:41 PM (02:00:26) Motion: To attach the EPS Report: Jerry Pape
09:28:52 PM (02:00:37) Planner Saunders clarified that the board had previously directed staff to not attach
the EPS Report.
09:30:37 PM (02:02:22) Motion Seconded: Jennifer Madgic
09:30:43 PM (02:02:28) Board Discussion
09:32:13 PM (02:03:58) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 8-0
09:34:12 PM (02:05:57) Motion: That the board send the document with their various comments and
changes back to the community development department and the consultants for the preparation of a new
draft.
09:35:29 PM (02:07:14) Chairman Happel closed the public hearing with regard to the board’s consideration
of the draft of the growth policy.
8
F. 09:35:34 PM (02:07:19) Discussion (Non-Action Item)
09:35:40 PM (02:07:25) Board member Pape informed the board that he believes that it is time for an oath of
office to be taken by the board.
G. 09:38:41 PM (02:10:26) FYI/Discussion
09:40:00 PM (02:11:45) Board member Costakis provided an FYI on a training she will be attending in Colorado.
H. 09:40:56 PM (02:12:41) 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).
9
City Planning Board
Tuesday, February 4, 2020 | 6:00 PM | City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 06:04:41 PM (00:02:56) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call
Present Were:
Jerry Pape
Jennifer Magdic
Chris Mehl
George Thompson
Henry Happel
Cathy Costakis
Lauren Waterton
Mark Egge
Paul Spitler
B. 06:05:13 PM (00:03:28) Changes to the Agenda
06:05:15 PM (00:03:30) Motion: Board member Pape proposed an opportunity to discuss the document that
he had presented.
06:07:29 PM (00:05:44) Motion failed for lack of a second
C. 06:08:08 PM (00:06:23) Minutes for Approval
10.1.19 Minutes (PDF)
o 10.1.19 Video Link
06:08:18 PM (00:06:33) Motion: To approve the minutes: Cathy Costakis
06:08:21 PM (00:06:36) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
06:08:25 PM (00:06:40) Vote on the motion: Motion carries 9-0
D. 06:08:38 PM (00:06:53) 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.
Public Comment on Future Land Use Map – Comma Q-01.21.20
Public Comment on Future Land Use Map – KNC-01.30.20
Public Comment on Future Land Use Map – NNK-01.30.20
10
06:09:02 PM (00:07:17) Chris Nixon (719 N Wallace) inquired about the 1897 Critical Land Study, where it sits
now and what the possibility of reviving it is. Additionally, he inquired about the possibility of separating Parks
and Public Lands so that the public has a more accurate view of the park lands that are present in the city.
06:11:13 PM (00:09:28) Planner Saunders provided a response to Mr. Nixon
E. 06:12:33 PM (00:10:48) Action Items
1. Triangle Community Plan (Saunders)
Review and recommendation on the draft Triangle Plan.
Plan
Plan Outreach
Plan Map
Report
06:12:40 PM (00:10:55) Staff Presentation: Planner Saunders presented the Triangle Community Plan to the
board.
06:21:58 PM (00:20:13) Board Discussion
06:23:12 PM (00:21:27) Chairman Happel asked board members to discuss if there was anything in the
document that the board felt was inconsistent with the draft growth policy.
06:47:07 PM (00:45:22) Motion: To make a recommendation that climate have a more explicit role in the
document: Jennifer Madgic
06:47:19 PM (00:45:34) Motion Seconded: Paul Spitler
06:47:22 PM (00:45:37) Commissioner Madgic spoke to her motion.
06:48:04 PM (00:46:19) Board member Spitler spoke to his second.
06:55:02 PM (00:53:17) Friendly Amendment: To add a bulleted point that says “Environmental responsibility”
right after “Financial Responsibility” on page 11: Jerry Pape
06:56:07 PM (00:54:22) Friendly Amendment Seconded: George Thompson
06:56:22 PM (00:54:37) Commissioner Madgic responded to board member Pape’s amendment, mentioning
that she thinks that it just needs to say climate change, as environment is already addressed on page 12.
06:58:13 PM (00:56:28) Vote on the friendly amendment: Motion fails 5-4
06:59:52 PM (00:58:07) Vote on the Motion: Motion carries 7-2
11
07:02:22 PM (01:00:37) Motion: To change “walkability” to “mobility”: Jerry Pape
07:02:52 PM (01:01:07) Motion Failed for lack of second
07:10:59 PM (01:09:14) Motion: That the board make a recommendation that this document clearly discerns
the difference between agriculture, state definition, and local food, local gardens, community gardens: Jennifer
Madgic
07:11:25 PM (01:09:40) Motion Seconded: Cathy Costakis
07:11:34 PM (01:09:49) Commissioner Madgic spoke to her motion
07:13:28 PM (01:11:43) Vote on the motion: Motion carries 9-0
07:15:54 PM (01:14:09) Motion: For school siting to be included in the language on page 21 and that it gets into
the policy section that schools are required to coordinate on siting of schools: Cathy Costakis
07:16:12 PM (01:14:27) Motion Seconded: Mark Egge
07:16:32 PM (01:14:47) Board member Waterton responded to board member Costakis’ motion, mentioning
that schools feel that this is a very complicated issue.
07:26:38 PM (01:24:53) Vote on the motion: motion carries 7-2
07:29:09 PM (01:27:24) Motion: To include a paragraph or topic on how to resolve difficulties in order to allow
the document to be a living document: Jerry Pape
07:29:30 PM (01:27:45) Motion failed for lack of a second
07:31:51 PM (01:30:06) Motion: For two small amendments: The first being under policy 4.7.6 to read “support
efforts to develop and maintain year-round separated bike baths along Huffine…” The second being under
policy 4.7.22 “to encourage public transportation router ship, the revision of the facilities that improve
operational efficiency, comfort, and ease of…” Mark Egge
07:33:44 PM (01:31:59) Motion Seconded: Lauren Waterton
07:33:46 PM (01:32:01) Chairman Happel recommended the motion be split into two motions to service the
two separate amendments.
07:34:02 PM (01:32:17) Board member Egge agreed, as long as board member Waterton’s second would
remain.
12
07:34:04 PM (01:32:19) Motion Part 1: Policy 4.7.6 To support efforts to create and maintain year-round a
separated bike pedestrian path along Huffine and other roads.
07:34:36 PM (01:32:51) Board Discussion
07:42:40 PM (01:40:55) Vote on the motion part 1: Motion fails 3-6
07:42:56 PM (01:41:11) Motion Part 2: To recommend page 24, policy 4.7.22 to add language speaking to
improving operational efficiencies in addition to the comfort and ease of the public transportation system.
07:43:50 PM (01:42:05) Motion Seconded: Chris Mehl
07:43:52 PM (01:42:07) Board Discussion
07:47:12 PM (01:45:27) Amendment to the motion: “encourage public transportation router ship through the
provision of bus rapid transit facilities, and facilities that improve the comfort and ease of the public
transportation system” Mark Egge
07:47:39 PM (01:45:54) Planner Saunders commented that he believed that the motion would fail with the
other partners on the Triangle Project.
07:49:41 PM (01:47:56) Motion: If board member Egge would release his motion, that the board accept the
document as it is with the changes the board had recommended to staff and move on: Jerry Pape
07:49:53 PM (01:48:08) Motion failed: Board member Egge did not release his motion.
07:50:21 PM (01:48:36) Vote on the motion: Motion passes 7-2
07:50:50 PM (01:49:05) Motion: To thank the participants, acknowledge its quality, accept the document with
changes recommended to staff and move on: Jerry Pape
07:50:59 PM (01:49:14) Motion Seconded: George Thompson
07:51:08 PM (01:49:23) Vote on the motion: Motion carried 9-0
07:52:39 PM (01:50:54) Motion: To re-open the proceedings for public comment: Jerry Pape
07:52:44 PM (01:50:59) Motion Seconded: Jennifer Madgic
07:52:44 PM (01:50:59) Vote on the Motion: Motion carries 9-0
07:52:51 PM (01:51:06) Public Comment Opportunity
13
07:52:59 PM (01:51:14) Kate Wright (501 S 3rd) commented in response to Commissioner Madgic’s comment
on food and agriculture.
F. 07:58:12 PM (01:56:27) Discussion (Non-Action Item)
07:58:13 PM (01:56:28) Board member Happel directed board members to the handout that board member
Pape distributed at the beginning of the meeting and recommended that it would be appropriate to put on the
agenda for the next meeting.
07:59:17 PM (01:57:32) Board member Pape commented that he is not looking for a vote on the document, but
he would like the opportunity to introduce it.
08:00:07 PM (01:58:22) Board member Pape provided an introduction to his document.
08:07:54 PM (02:06:09) Chairman Happel proposed that he would like to speak with city attorneys to discuss
changing the bylaws of the board.
G. FYI/Discussion
H. 08:16:28 PM (02:14:43) 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).
14
City Planning Board
Tuesday, February 18, 2020 | 7:00 PM | City Commission Chamber – 121 N. Rouse Avenue
A. 07:02:04 PM (00:01:26) Call Meeting to Order & Roll Call
Present Were:
Paul Spitler
Chris Mehl
Henry Happel
George Thompson
Mark Egge
Cathy Costakis
Jennifer Madgic
Jerry Pape
B. 07:02:31 PM (00:01:53) Changes to the Agenda
C. Minutes for Approval (None)
D. 07:02:42 PM (00:02:04) 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. 07:03:03 PM (00:02:25) Action Items
1. The Nest Preliminary Plat #19373 (Rosenberg)
Application requesting a proposed subdivision consisting of 13 lots on 5.4 acres in the Westbrook
Subdivision. Located west of Rosa Way and between Annie St. and Durston.
19373 Staff Report
19373 Application Documents
19373 Preliminary Plat
19373 Preliminary Plat Supplements
19373 Open Space Plan
19373 Trail and Sidewalk
19373 Landscape Plans
07:03:06 PM (00:02:28) Chairman Happel inquired whether there were any conflicts of interest or if there had
been any ex-parte communications to disclose.
07:03:39 PM (00:03:01) Staff Presentation: Planner Rosenberg presented The Nest Preliminary Plat Project to
the board and recommended approval for the project.
15
07:10:40 PM (00:10:02) Board Questions: Board members directed questions to Planner Rosenberg.
07:32:11 PM (00:31:33) Applicant Presentation: Greg Stratton of Kilday and Stratton introduced his team and
presented their project to the board.
07:39:29 PM (00:38:51) Board Questions: Board members directed questions to Mr. Stratton.
07:48:22 PM (00:47:44) Public Comment Opportunity: None
07:48:49 PM (00:48:11) Board Discussion
07:49:11 PM (00:48:33) 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 19-
373 and move to recommend approval of the subdivision with conditions and subject to all applicable code
provisions: George Thompson
07:49:36 PM (00:48:58) Motion Seconded: Mark Egge
07:49:42 PM (00:49:04) Board member Thompson spoke to his motion in favor of the application.
07:50:13 PM (00:49:35) Board member Pape spoke in opposition of the alley way in the subdivision.
07:52:16 PM (00:51:38) Board member Egge spoke in favor of the application.
07:53:44 PM (00:53:06) Vote on the motion: Motion carries unanimously.
F. Discussion (Non-Action Item)
G. 07:54:13 PM (00:53:35) FYI/Discussion
07:54:15 PM (00:53:37) Board member Costakis informed the board members about the training she attended
in Grand Junction, CO.
07:55:57 PM (00:55:19) Mayor Mehl informed the board about the upcoming Planning Coordinating Committee
meeting and inquired about which member of the board was going to take the place of former board member
Waterton.
H. 07:57:40 PM (00:57:02) 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).
16
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-19-21
Page 1 of 5
THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
Monday, April 19th, 2021
00:00:06 WebEx Meeting Information
A) 00:03:25 Call Meeting to Order
Present: Henry Happel, Richard Rudnicki, Gerald Pape, Mark Egge, Matthew Hausauer, Jennifer
Madgic
Absent: Cathy Costakis, George Thompson
B) Disclosures
C) 00:04:02 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:04:11 Approval of Minutes
D.1 Minutes Approval for 01-14-20 and 04-05-21
01-14-20 Planning Board Minutes.pdf
04-05-21 Planning Board Minutes DRAFT.pdf
00:04:49 Motion D) Approval of Minutes
Gerald Pape: Motion
Richard Rudnicki: 2nd
00:04:53 Vote on the Motion to approve D) Approval of Minutes. The Motion carried 6 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Richard Rudnicki
Gerald Pape
Mark Egge
Matthew Hausauer
Jennifer Madgic
17
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-19-21
Page 2 of 5
Disapprove:
None
E) 00:05:00 Public Comment
No public comment at this time.
G) 00:08:55 Action Items
G.1 00:08:59 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
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
Board member Pape recused himself from action item 1, stating that he has a financial interest in the
matter.
00:10:37 Staff Presentation
City Planner Chris Saunders presented to the board the modification to the previously approved
Preliminary Plat application where he outlined the master plan of the project, the application materials
for the project, key elements of the project, and recommended that the subdivision conforms to
standards and is sufficient for approval.
00:16:50 Board Questions
Board members directed questions to Planner Saunders.
00:22:25 Applicant Presentation
Engineer Cordell Pool presented on behalf of the applicant.
00:26:26 Board Questions
Board members directed questions to the applicant.
00:29:32 Public Comment Opportunity
None at this time.
00:34:44 Board Discussion
Chairman Happel commented in support of the application.
18
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-19-21
Page 3 of 5
Board member Hausauer commented in support of the application.
00:39:41 Motion 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.
Matthew Hausauer: Motion
Mark Egge: 2nd
00:39:54 Vote on the Motion to approve 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. The Motion carried 5 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Richard Rudnicki
Mark Egge
Matthew Hausauer
Jennifer Madgic
Disapprove:
None
G.2 00:40:18 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.
Div 38 270 PB Staff Report.pdf
Ordinance 2074 Div 38 270 Improvements and Guarantees.pdf
07-13-20 City Commission Packet Materials - A5. Res 5179 Ordering Installation of
Sidewalks.pdf
00:40:36 Staff presentation
City Attorney Kelley Rischke presented to the board the text amendment where she outlined the
primary objective of the edits and recommended that the application meets criteria for approval.
00:46:09 Board Questions
Board members directed questions to staff.
00:55:35 Public Comment Opportunity
01:00:45 Board Discussion
19
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-19-21
Page 4 of 5
Board member Hausauer commented in favor of the application.
Board member Egge commented in favor of the application.
Board member Pape commented in favor of the application.
Chairman Happel commented in favor of the application.
01:07:46 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.
Gerald Pape: Motion
Matthew Hausauer: 2nd
01:07:54 Vote on the Motion to approve 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. The Motion
carried 6 - 0
Approve:
Henry Happel
Richard Rudnicki
Gerald Pape
Mark Egge
Matthew Hausauer
Jennifer Madgic
Disapprove:
None
01:08:23 Continuation of additional action items
Chairman Happel inquired if board members would like to postpone the additional action items as all
board members were not present.
Board members agreed that all members should be present for the work session.
H) 01:13:55 FYI/Discussion
Staff liaison Rogers reminded board members that the next board meeting is a joint meeting with the
Zoning Commission.
I) 01:14:58 Adjournment
For more information please contact Tom Rogers at trogers@bozeman.netThis board generally meets the
2nd and 4th Monday of each month from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM
20
Bozeman Planning Board Meeting Minutes, 04-19-21
Page 5 of 5
21
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:May 3, 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,
22
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.
Three examples of subdivision Pre-Application narratives are attached
to this memo for your consideration including the Blackwood Groves,
Bridger View Redevelopment, and Gran Cielo subdivisions.
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. Using the same examples as the Pre-
Application narrative examples of preliminary plat application
narratives are attached for your consideration.
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
23
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
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:
Hoover Way Pre-Application Plat.pdf
Hoover Way Preliminary Plat Map_08-18-2017.pdf
Bridger View Pre-Application Narrative 04-02-19.pdf
Bridger View Preliminary Plat Summary and Document
Org.pdf
Gran Cielo Pre-Application Narrative 01-29-19.pdf
Gran Cielo Preliminary Plat Narrative 10-25-2017.pdf
Blackwood Groves Pre-application Narrative 10-21-2020.pdf
Blackwood Groves Preliminary Plat Narrative 01-06-2021.pdf
Hoover Way Final Plat Page 1 05-24-2019.pdf
Report compiled on: April 14, 2021
24
RENEE WAYBLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)25
BLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)26
27
Bridger View Redevelopment
Subdivision Planned Unit Development (PUD) Pre-Application Narrative
April 2019
Summary:
This subdivision Planned Unit Development Pre-Application is for the creation of a mixed-income
residential neighborhood offering modest, efficient homes with half of the homes subsidized to reduce
the sales price so that residents at various income levels can afford to purchase. A community land trust
will be used to ensure the subsidy investment and affordability are maintained long-term. This innovative
model neighborhood will meaningfully address Bozeman’s community housing needs, complement the
adjacent community park and benefit the entire community.
The idea to reestablish a residential neighborhood on this property was conceived as a separate but
parallel component of The Trust for Public Land’s work to create the adjacent Story Mill Community Park
in partnership with the City of Bozeman. A portion of the larger site formerly housed a 92-family trailer
park that was removed in 2008 to make way for a 1,200-unit housing and 140,000 square foot commercial
development proposal that failed to move forward. The Trust for Public Land acquired the property in
2012 as part of the larger Story Mill Community Park property purchase, retaining the 8-acre parcel to
explore the feasibility of returning some affordable homes on a portion of the site – honoring the history
and complementing the new park.
In late 2017, the Bridger View Redevelopment Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) was informally
reviewed by the Development Review Committee, the Design Review Board and the City Commission.
Many insightful and detailed comments were provided as part of that early project review. The Trust for
Public Land and HRDC announced their partnership earlier this year to pick up where the project left off
in the development review process. Since a waiver of the Pre-Application is no longer available in the code
for affordable housing projects, the owners and applicants would like to now complete the second part
of the informal review (Pre-Application) and then combine all the comments from these early reviews to
better prepare for the next entitlement stages of Preliminary PUD and Preliminary Plat. The following
chart summarizes the entitlement steps:
Step Application Status
1a
1b
Concept PUD
Subdivision Pre-Application
Completed
In process
2a
2b
Growth Policy Amendment
Zone Map Amendment
In process
In process
3 Preliminary PUD & Preliminary Plat Anticipated summer 2019
4 Final PUD Anticipated spring 2020
5 Final Plat(s) To be sequenced with concurrent
construction and phasing plan
It is essential to note that the attached Pre-Application drawings are based on the ideas and concepts
presented with the Concept PUD. The preapplication drawings do not attempt to address the comments
from the Concept PUD. We anticipate that several internal design charrettes and additional meetings with
City Staff will occur to work through details before the Preliminary PUD and Preliminary Plat submittals.
As required, a detailed narrative that responds to all the comments from both the Concept PUD and Pre-
Application will be included with the Preliminary PUD and Preliminary Plat submittals.
28
List of Questions:
1. Waivers - will the DRC grant the requested supplemental waivers as outlined in the attached
table?
2. Relaxations – are there any additional relaxations identified by Staff at this time?
3. Parkland – please clarify the process and timing for using improvements in lieu of dedicated
parkland as proposed. Note that we would like to review before the Recreation & Parks Advisory
Board Subdivision Review Committee as part of this Pre-Application.
Aerial view of the neighborhood (image: kestrelaerial.com)
29
Bridger View PUDP & PLAT Applications
Project Summary | Page 1
Project Summary
Project
Bridger View is envisioned as a diverse neighborhood where households at various income
levels, stages of life, sizes and backgrounds can afford to purchase a home in Bozeman. The
new neighborhood features 62 modest, well-designed houses compatible in scale with
Bozeman’s older neighborhoods. The design provides adequate parking while emphasizing
pedestrian pathways and connectivity including adjacency to the new Story Mill Community
Park and regional trails. Characteristics include a comfortable neighborhood scale, walkable
streetscape, modest size, simple construction and shared community spaces. Porches, front
yards, sidewalks, shared courtyards and tree-lined streets offer a welcoming setting.
The Human Resource Development Council (HRDC) plans to develop the neighborhood in its
entirety ensuring a level of quality design and overall coordination. Exceeding the standards of
Bozeman’s Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, 50 percent of the houses will be perpetually
affordable to households of moderate income. A new community land trust (CLT) will be
established, drawing on the expertise and capacity of HRDC, to permanently preserve the
condition and availability of affordably priced homes at Bridger View. Market rate and CLT
homes will be interspersed throughout the site, indistinguishable in quality and design.
This project will create an innovative neighborhood that provides an inventory of homes that are
permanently affordable. As a community based-model, it integrates private development, non-
profit and philanthropic investments along with cost-sharing for offsite infrastructure upgrades by
the City of Bozeman through the Capital Improvements Plan.
History
The site is an 8-acre parcel of land located at the junction of Bridger Drive and Story Mill Road.
A dense development plan was approved for the parcel and surrounding properties in 2008 but
failed after changing the zoning, annexing into the city and closing the 92-family trailer park. The
Trust for Public Land (TPL) acquired the property in 2012 as part of the larger Story Mill
Community Park development plan. TPL transferred the property to HRDC and formed a
partnership to develop the Bridger View conceptual plan and support for the housing
neighborhood.
The following entitlement and outreach steps have been completed to date:
• In 2017, the Bridger View Concept Planned Unit Development (PUD) was informally
reviewed by the Development Review Committee, the Design Review Board, the
Planning Board and the City Commission.
• The Subdivision Pre-Application was reviewed in April of 2019 by the Development
Review Committee and the Recreation and Parks Advisory Board.
30
Bridger View PUDP & PLAT Applications
Project Summary | Page 2
• A Growth Policy Map Amendment and Zone Map Amendment were both approved in
Summer 2019 by the City Commission.
• Neighbors and community members were invited to an August 1, 2019 informational
meeting and provided positive comments and responses to the development team
partnership.
The team has carefully analyzed all of the feedback from City departments, elected officials,
volunteer boards, neighbors and potential future residents.
Project Overview & Design Intent
Bridger View’s goal is lasting affordability and livability. Through the lens of this longer view, the
quality of construction and materials and the integrity of the natural systems that will sustain the
neighborhood become even more important. The Bridger View Owners Association will exercise
long-term stewardship of the entire neighborhood as detailed in the Design Guidelines and
covenants. Community Land Trust families will have the added support and stewardship of that
entity.
Bridger View, with a net density of 7.9 houses/acre, offers a variety of clustered attached and
detached homes that range in size from 750 to 1,575 square feet. This product type fills a gap
that is in limited supply in Bozeman and fits within the greater neighborhood context. Lots,
ranging in size from 1700 to 3650 square feet, are sized to accommodate modest front yards
and usable front porches, with back and/or side yards as private outdoor space.
Long-term sustainability and affordability are being achieved for both the neighborhood and
individual home construction. LEED for Neighborhood Design is being pursued as well as a
sustainability framework for the homes, which emphasis well-built construction techniques that
meet national best practices in sustainability, lowering both initial costs and long-term
operations and maintenance costs.
The site has direct vehicular access to two major streets, Bridger Drive and Story Mill Road and
exceptional pedestrian and bike connectivity via the existing Story Mill Spur Trail, the new Path
to the M as well as trails throughout Story Mill Community Park. While Hillside Lane will be built
to the city’s standard for public streets, the other internal streets are intentionally smaller in
scale commensurate with older neighborhood streets. These “shared streets” are designed to
limit the speed of cars, making them safe and friendlier places. Adequate parking is accessed
from alleys and the simplified street grid and compact development give ready access to the site
for emergency vehicles.
Everyday safety is a primary concern in the design of Bridger View. A key component of this is
right sized streets that slow vehicles moving through the neighborhood and a site plan laid out
to provide efficient access to units by emergency vehicles, residents, and guests.
This application is purposefully very different than a typical suburban residential subdivision. In
a compact neighborhood such as this, it is essential that every site element from unit sizes and
setbacks to utility spacing and street widths is thoroughly analyzed and thoughtfully designed to
31
Bridger View PUDP & PLAT Applications
Project Summary | Page 3
be the right scale without sacrificing safety and functionality. This scaling down results in the
need for relaxations from code standards. Wherever possible, national best practices are
incorporated into the project.
Document Organization
Two concurrent applications are being submitted for this project:
• The Preliminary PUD sets the stage for the neighborhood with Design Guidelines that
are written to uphold the sustainable pattern established by the development and
construction of the project. Relaxations are requested for design excellence and for
alternative new standards that enhance and protect health, safety and welfare. PUD
Points help to quantify the community benefit of this project.
• The Preliminary Plat permits a subdivision to allow the homes to sit on individual lots,
compatible with the ownership model.
While the applications are separate, they are dependent on one another. Some key documents,
such as the Design Guidelines, are repeated in both submittals to allow advisory boards that
may only be reviewing one application to have more access to the data and information and
underlying intent of the overall project.
32
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification Pre-Application Narrative
Page 1 of 5
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification
Pre-Application Narrative
Pre-application Requirements
§38.220.030 Subdivision Pre-Application Plan
A. Sketch Map
1. A sketch map showing adjoining subdivisions and certificates of survey(s), along
with adjacent lot and tract lines is included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
2. Location, name, width and owner of existing or proposed streets, roads and
easement within the proposed subdivision; existing streets, roads and easements
within adjacent subdivisions and tracts; and the name of the street or road that
provides access from the nearest public street or road to the proposed subdivision
is included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
3. Location of all existing structures, including buildings, railroads, powerline
towers, and improvements inside and within 100 feet of the proposed subdivision
is included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
4. Zoning classification within the proposed subdivision and adjacent to it is
included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
B. Topographic Features
1. A topographic map of the subdivision, is included in the attached Pre-Application
Map.
2. Embankments, water courses, drainage channels, areas of seasonal water ponding,
areas within the designated floodway, marsh areas, wetlands, rock outcrops,
wooded areas, noxious weeds and areas of active faults are included in the
attached Pre-Application Map.
Note: Copies of all required permits listed in §38.220.020, were previously submitted
under the Gran Cielo Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
C. Utilities
1. Location, size and depth of sanitary and storm sewers, water mains and gas lines
are included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
2. Location of fire hydrants, electric lines, telephone lines, sewage and water
treatment, and storage facilities are included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
D. Subdivision Layout
1. Subdivision block, tract, and lot boundary lines, with numbers, dimensions, and
areas for each lot are included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
2. Existing street locations, right-of-way widths, and names are included in the
attached Pre-Application Map.
3. Easement location, width and purpose are included in the attached Pre-
Application Map.
4. Proposed Park/common open space are shown on the attached Pre-Application
Map.
33
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification Pre-Application Narrative
Page 2 of 5
5. No sites for commercial centers, churches, schools, industrial areas, or
manufactured housing community are proposed.
E. Development Plan
There are four phases in this project. The phasing of the project has not changed
and is shown on the overall site plan.
F. Name and Location
A title block indicating the proposed name, quarter section, section, township,
range, principal meridian and county of subdivision are included in the attached
Pre-Application Map.
G. Notations
Scale, north arrow, name and addresses of owners and developers, and date of
preparation are included in the attached Pre-Application Map.
H. Variances
No variances are requested with this application.
I. Waivers
§38.220.060 Additional Subdivision Preliminary Plat Supplements
A. Surface Water
A waiver is requested for Surface Water Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
B. Floodplains
A waiver is requested for Floodplains Supplement information as all information
was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
C. Groundwater
A waiver is requested for Groundwater Supplement information as all information
was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
D. Geology – Soils - Slopes
A waiver is requested for Geology – Soils - Slopes Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
34
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification Pre-Application Narrative
Page 3 of 5
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
E. Vegetation
A waiver is requested for Vegetation Supplement information as all information
was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
F. Wildlife
A waiver is requested for Wildlife Supplement information as all information was
previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
G. Historical Features
A waiver is requested for Historical Features Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
H. Agriculture
A waiver is requested for Agriculture Supplement information as all information
was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
I. Agricultural Water User Facilities
A waiver is requested for Agricultural Water User Facilities Supplement
information as all information was previously submitted and reviewed under the
Gran Cielo Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
J. Water and Sewer
A waiver is requested for Water and Sewer Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application. The sewer and water design reports
submitted with the Preliminary Plat Application calculated the sewer and water
demands on a gross per acre basis by zoning using the City of Bozeman Design
Standards. Therefore, the estimated capacity analysis will remain the same.
K. Stormwater Management
A waiver is requested for Stormwater Management Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application. The stormwater management
35
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification Pre-Application Narrative
Page 4 of 5
calculations were calculated a on a gross per acre basis by zoning using the City
of Bozeman Design Standards. Therefore, the estimated stormwater runoff and
detention pond calculations will remain the same.
L. Streets, Roads and Alleys
A waiver is requested for Streets, Roads and Alleys Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
M. Utilities
A waiver is requested for Utilities Supplement information as all information was
previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
N. Educational Facilities
A waiver is requested for Educational Facilities Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application. The population estimates for the
school system were done on a per acre basis based by zoning.
O. Land Use
No waiver is requested. The land use section will be updated and submitted.
P. Parks and Recreation Facilities
No waiver is requested. A revised Park Plan will be submitted.
Q. Neighborhood Center Plan
No waiver is requested. A revised Neighborhood Center Plan will be submitted.
R. Lighting Plan
A waiver is requested for Lighting Plan Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
S. Miscellaneous
A waiver is requested for Miscellaneous Supplement information as all
information was previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Application.
36
Gran Cielo Subdivision Modification Pre-Application Narrative
Page 5 of 5
T. Affordable Housing
A waiver is requested for Affordable Housing information as all information was
previously submitted and reviewed under the Gran Cielo Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Application.
K. Digital (PDF) Copy
Gran Cielo Subdivision Pre-Application submittal has been uploaded to the
attached CD-ROM.
In summary, we are requesting waivers to all required supplemental informational, except for
Land Use, Parks and Recreation Facilities, and the Neighborhood Center Plan, as the proposed
subdivision was previously approved and only the park is proposed to be modified.
37
38
39
BLACKWOOD GROVES
SUBDIVISION PRE-APPLICATION
40
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 2 of 23
Table of Contents
NARRATIVE:
Section I. - Project Team
Section II - Introduction
Section III - Subdivision Pre-Application Plan Narrative
Section IV - Project Specific Questions for Staff
Section V - Response to Informal Comments (File No. 20-073)
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Draft Phasing Plan
Appendix B: Draft Community Design Framework Master Plan
Appendix C: Blackwood Groves Sewer Allocation Memo
Appendix D: Vicinity Map Parks and Trails
Appendix E: Draft Parks Master Plan
Appendix F: Covenant Location Exhibit
Appendix G: Residential Density Covenant
Appendix H: Commercial Area Restrictive Covenant
Appendix I: Park Restriction Covenant
Appendix J: Recorded Annexation Agreement
Appendix K: Pre-application Maps
Appendix L: USGS Topo Map
PLANS:
Landscape
Green Plan
Civil
Existing Topographic Survey
Zoning Map
41
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 3 of 23
I. PROJECT TEAM
OWNER & Blackwood Land Fund, LLC
APPLICANT 140 Village Crossing Way, Unit 3B
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.539.6015
PLANNER Intrinsik Architecture, Inc.
111 N. Tracy Avenue,
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.582.8988
ENGINEER C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1091 Stoneridge Drive,
Bozeman, MT 59718
p: 406.587.1115
ARCHITECT Abramson
5171 West Jefferson Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90016
p: 310.630.2126
ARCHITECT KTGY
1390 Lawrence Street, Suite 100
Denver, CO 80204
p: 303.623.5186
ARCHITECT Design Workshop
17911 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
p: 949.851.2133
LANDSCAPE Design 5
ARCHITECT 37 E. Main Street,
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.587.4873
42
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 4 of 23
Figure 1: Property Vicinity
II. INTRODUCTION
Blackwood Groves (“Blackwood Groves” or the “Property”) is a 119.45 acre property that is located to
the south and west of the current terminus of South 11th Avenue, and sits directly south of Alder Creek
Subdivision (Figure 1). Sacajawea Middle School comprises most of the eastern boundary, whereas
South 19th Ave acts as the Property’s western boundary. Blackwood Groves is envisioned as a walkable,
lifestyle-oriented, mixed-use community, which consists of a diverse set of residents with a range of
income and demographics, that also provides amenities and services to all surrounding neighborhoods.
The Property, approximately 2.5 miles south of Downtown Bozeman, is situated with panoramic views
to the Bridger Range to the north, Gallatin Range to the east, Spanish Peaks and Madison Range to the
south, and Tobacco Root Mountains to the west. The community is specifically planned to embrace the
Property’s proximity, natural features, and stunning vistas to create a public realm that is seamlessly
connected to greater Bozeman but distinct in its inherent walkability and sense of place.
The neighborhood will coalesce around a dynamic center that is planned to serve as a hub of
community-oriented amenities; amenities such as restaurants, retail and commercial services,
entertainment, and recreational activities. This mixed-use hub of features and services will be
surrounded by a variety of housing types and price points, specifically intended to encourage a diverse
and dynamic mix of residents with a range of demographics and income levels. This is of particular
43
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 5 of 23
importance, given the proximity of significant education centers to the property – namely Sacajawea
Middle School, Morning Star Elementary, and Montana State University.
The residential and mixed-use town center neighborhoods within the Property are envisioned to be
interconnected by a series of parks, plazas, natural open spaces and biking/hiking trails that celebrate
the connection to the outdoors and encourage vehicles to be used as a last resort – instead of the first
(or more often, the only) option. This series of multi-modal connections throughout the Property, along
with well-planned and activated streetscapes, are intended to encourage a social atmosphere within
the community.
In June 2020, the Property was annexed into the City of Bozeman and underwent a Growth Policy
Amendment and Zone Map Amendment Review. Following those approvals, the property is now
classified as Residential Emphasis Mixed Use zoning and future land use. This proposal shows
conformance with the UDC standards for development within this zone or clarifies when such necessary
information is to be provided.
The Applicant has also submitted a Master Site Plan application (File No. 20-292) and has received
comments from the City’s Planning Division in response to this submittal. It is the intention of the project
team to respond to the Master Site Plan comments, as well as update that submittal, using the Revisions
and Corrections process concurrent with the future Preliminary Plat application. The estimated project
schedule for the next year is included below.
Figure 2: Proposed Schedule
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
2021 20222020
Current Date
October 20, 2020
Subdivision Pre-ApplicationReview
Preliminary Plat Engineering
Infrastructure Review
SubdivisionPre-Application Prep
Preliminary Plat Prep
InfrastructureEngineering
Infrastructure Construction
Phase AFinal Plat
Phase A FinalPlat Prep
Bidding
Bid Review & Contract
Preliminary Plat Review Complete
Construction Admin
Preliminary Plat City Commission (Concurrent with MSP)
FinancialGuarantee Incomplete Improvements
Pre-App Engineering
Master Site Plan RC Application Review (Concurrent with Preliminary Plat)
Master Site Plan RC Application Prep
Preliminary Plat Intake (Concurrent with MSP)
Prelim Plat Staff Review &Minor Board Review(Concurrent with MSP)
PrelimPlat Planning Board Review(Concurrent with MSP)
Preliminary Plat StaffReport & Noticing(Concurrent with MSP)
44
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 6 of 23
III. SUBDIVISION PRE-APPLICATION PLAN NARRATIVE
The following is a summary of the Bozeman Municipal Code Section 38.220.030 regarding submittal
requirements for a subdivision pre-application plan, as well as a narrative response summarizing how
each of the required sections has been satisfied with this submittal. The Applicant has also included
many of the Plans and Appendices from the Master Site Plan submittal (COB File No. 20-292) to provide
additional context to the Pre-application as necessary (see the Table of Contents for the location of
these files).
A. The pre-application plan must include:
1. A sketch map showing:
a. The names of adjoining subdivisions and numbers of adjoining certificates of survey,
along with adjacent lot and tract lines.
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K (Also found in the Civil Plans).
b. Location, name, width and owner of existing or proposed streets, roads and easements
within the proposed subdivision; existing streets, roads and easements within adjacent
subdivisions and tracts; and the name of street or road that provides access from the
nearest public street or road to the proposed subdivision.
This information is shown on pages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Appendix K.
The applicant is proposing back-in angle parking for the road sections of South 15th Avenue
and Street B along the perimeter of the community commercial Town Center. The back-in
angle parking is designed to satisfy the Street and circulation standards as stated in the
UDC– REMU District – Special standards (Sec. 38.330.020). This section stipulates that “on-
street parking should be maximized wherever feasible” to “create a connected and vibrant
public realm.” The proposed back-in angle parking maximizes on-street parking
surrounding the Town Center while providing a safer, more efficient parking configuration
than the typical parallel street parking. This design maximizes on-street parking which will
promote a “compact and walkable neighborhood setting” by decreasing the need for
undesirable parking lots (Sec.38.300.110.F.3).
The back-in-angle parking is also designed in accordance with the intent and purpose of
the REMU District as the proposed design will “reinforce the principle of streets as public
places that encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking and physical
elements of complete streets” (Sec. 38.300.110.F.5.e.). The proposed road sections exceed
the minimum features of the Suggested Local Street Standards which note that “narrower
or wider local street configurations may be acceptable depending on the character of the
neighborhood (Figure 9-13 of the Bozeman Master Transportation Plan – 2007). The
proposed road sections appear to satisfy the Bozeman Municipal Code, City of Bozeman
Design Standards and Specifications Minimum Street Design Standards for City Streets, and
the Bozeman Transportation Master Plan - 2017.
45
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 7 of 23
The advantages of back-in angle parking are:
• Provides an open field of vision for the driver when exiting. Drivers are facing
forward when leaving a parking space and have improved visibility of pedestrians,
bicyclists, and vehicles.
• Eliminates the dangerous door zone created by parallel parked vehicle doors
opening into bicycle lanes/traffic.
• Positions the driver and passengers to enter and exit the vehicle away from traffic
and towards the sidewalk as the car doors open towards pedestrian facilities and
away from travel lanes. Parallel parking requires the driver/passengers on the
driver’s side of the vehicle to enter/exit/load/unload within a bicycle or vehicle
travel lane. Back-in-angle parking eliminates this risk.
• Loading/unloading the trunk of the vehicle is made safer by positioning the rear of
the vehicle adjacent to the sidewalk instead of the traveled roadway.
• Maximizes on-street parking (provides more spaces than parallel parking).
• The general consensus is that back-in angle parking is easier and quicker to back into
than parallel parking spaces.
Back-in angle parking is a new concept for Bozeman users (like
roundabouts 10 years ago) so drivers may be unfamiliar with the
backing technique at first. The wide prevalence of backup cameras
(which is now required by law for new vehicles) will expedite this
learning curve. Instructional signs, like pictured below, will be installed
by the developer to instruct drivers. These signs could be branded
with the Blackwood Groves logo to instill a community sense to this
new parking configuration.
Blackwood Groves is designed to be a compact, walkable community such that all
residents can walk from their residences to the commercial services within the Town
Center. The on-street parking spaces are intended to satisfy the parking requirements for
the future uses proposed within the Town Center in accordance with the off-site parking
section of the UDC (Sec. 38.540.070).
c. Location of all existing structures, including buildings, railroads, power lines towers, and
improvements inside and within 100 feet of the proposed subdivision.
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K.
d. Zoning classification within the proposed subdivision and adjacent to it. The zoning
proposed for the subdivision, if a change is contemplated.
This requirement has been satisfied on page 1 of Appendix K.
Furthermore, the applicant understands that the requirements of the Residential Emphasis
Mixed Use (REMU) zoning district and applicable UDC standards will apply for all individual
phases. The applicant intends to ensure future development is proposed consistent with
46
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 8 of 23
UDC REMU required limits on non-residential land uses during future Site Plan applications
submitted for each phase.
2. Topographic features. Topographic features of the proposed subdivision and adjacent
subdivisions and tracts, including:
a. A current U.S. Geological Survey topographic map at the largest scale available with the
subdivision clearly outlined.
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K.
b. Embankments, watercourses, drainage channels, areas of seasonal water ponding, areas
within the designated floodway, marsh areas, wetlands, rock outcrops, wooded areas,
noxious weeds and areas of active faults. Include copies of any permits listed in section
38.220.020 that have been obtained for the project.
This information has been shown on page 1 of Appendix K. There are existing wetlands
associated with the watercourses running through the property (Civil Sheet C.1.0). The
applicant has preliminarily coordinated with Brian Heaston (City Engineer) to identify which
watercourses within the project are subject to the 50-ft watercourse setback. The
applicant’s understanding for each ditch/watercourse is as follows (please refer to the plat
map for locations):
Unnamed Watercourse – West
Type: Irrigation Ditch Lateral – Middle Creek Ditch Company.
Setback Required: No.
310 Permit Required: No.
Description: Man-made irrigation ditch lateral that is controlled by a headgate located
just west of the 19th Ave/Goldenstein Ln intersection on the main middle creek ditch.
Unnamed Watercourse – North
Type: Irrigation Ditch Lateral – Middle Creek Ditch Company.
Setback Required: No.
310 Permit Required: No.
Description: Man-made irrigation ditch lateral that is controlled by a headgate within the
subject property.
Unnamed Watercourse – South
Type: Irrigation Ditch Lateral – Middle Creek Ditch Company.
Setback Required: No.
310 Permit Required: No.
Description: Man-made irrigation ditch lateral that sources from a man-made drain tile
that was installed to drain the agricultural property to the south of the subject property.
Unnamed Watercourse – Middle (Alder Creek)
Type: Natural Drainage Channel also considered an Irrigation Ditch Lateral of the Middle
Creek Ditch Company.
47
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 9 of 23
Setback Required: Yes.
310 Permit Required: TBD.
Description: Natural drainage channel that is considered to be the natural continuation of
Alder Creek (or Flanders Creek). The Middle Creek Ditch Company considers this to be an
irrigation ditch lateral as well. This watercourse has wetlands that extend beyond the
channel banks.
Unnamed Watercourse – East
Type: Irrigation/Drainage Ditch
Setback Required: Yes.
310 Permit Required: No.
Description: Man-made irrigation/drainage ditch lateral that was cut along the east
property line (west property line of the sod farm property). The ditch was likely cut to
serve as a drainage ditch for the agricultural properties to the south and southeast. The
ditch does not continue to Goldenstein Lane and appears to form from a seep on the
property to the south. The seep does not appear to be man-made so it is understood that
the watercourse setback would apply to this ditch. Wetlands do not extend beyond the
channel banks of this ditch.
3. Utilities. The existing and proposed utilities located on and adjacent to the proposed
subdivision including:
a. Location, size and depth of sanitary and storm sewers, water mains and gas lines.
All existing and proposed utilities have been shown on page 1 of Appendix K. 10’ utility
easements have been shown for the dry utilities and the applicants are currently working
with Northwestern Energy to establish a desirable utility layout for the subdivision.
b. Location of fire hydrants, electric lines, telephone lines, sewage and water treatment,
and storage facilities.
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K.
4. Subdivision layout. The proposed layout of the subdivision showing the approximate:
a. Subdivision block, tract, and lot boundary lines, with numbers, dimensions, and areas for
each block, tract and lot.
b. Street location, right-of-way width, and name.
c. Easement location, width and purpose.
d. Sites to be dedicated or reserved as park, common open space or other public areas, with
boundaries, dimensions and areas.
e. Sites for commercial centers, churches, schools, industrial areas, multi-household units,
manufactured housing community and uses other than single-household residences.
48
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 10 of 23
This information is shown on pages 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of Appendix K.
Moreover, to provide additional development assurances, Blackwood Groves has entered
into three restrictive covenants with its neighbors. Three restrictive covenants are in-place
to provide certain protections to the neighbors along the northern and eastern borders of
the Property (Appendix F).
1. Residential Density. This covenant restricts the density and use within a certain distance
of the Alder Creek property lines. (Appendix G).
2. Commercial Area Restriction. This covenant prohibits commercial uses within certain
distances of the Alder Creek property lines. (Appendix H).
3. Park Restriction. This covenant requires open space and park uses along certain
portions of the eastern Property boundary. (Appendix I).
Lots are proposed to front onto streets, an improved alley and trail/greenway corridor for
at least twenty-five (Sec. 38.400.090.B.2.c), or onto courtyards for the cottage housing
developments. A combination of parks and commercial centers are imagined satisfying the
neighborhood center requirements for this subdivision. See Appendix E for additional
details on theses proposed centers.
5. Development plan. An overall development plan indicating future development of the
remainder of the tract, if the tract is to be developed in phases.
The applicant is proposing to entitle the entirety of the subdivision under one Pre-application
and Preliminary Plat. The subdivision phases will then be developed using extensions of the
Preliminary Plat and Final Plats for each phase. The proposed Phasing Plan (Appendix A) for
Blackwood Groves is based on current and future infrastructure requirements and the
constructability of each phase. The applicant understands there is a requirement for parkland
and open space, neighborhood centers, and affordable housing with each phase, and these
requirements will be confirmed during future Site Plan reviews. Parkland phasing is described
herein, and affordable housing phasing will be detailed within the applicant’s affordable
housing plan to be submitted with the subdivision Preliminary Plat application. Financial
guarantees will be provided as necessary to ensure the development is constructed according
the proposed Phasing Plan. Should modification of the proposed phasing become necessary,
the applicant will ensure any modified phasing sequencing will line up with City standards and
requirements and make sure that all road and infrastructure networks are properly
connected.
6. Name and location. A title block indicating the proposed name, quarter-section, section,
township, range, principal meridian and county of subdivision.
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K.
7. Notations. Scale, north arrow, name and addresses of owners and developers, and date of
preparation.
49
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 11 of 23
This information is shown on page 1 of Appendix K.
8. Variances. A list of variance requests which will be submitted with the application for
preliminary plat application.
This subdivision does not anticipate any variance requests. Please see section IV of this
narrative for project specific questions for City Staff.
9. Waivers. A list of waivers requested from the requirements of section 38.220.060 must be
submitted with the pre-application. The DRC is responsible for granting waivers, and the
community development department staff must notify the developer in writing of any
waivers granted from section 38.220.060 after the pre-application meeting or plan review.
Below is a list of requested waivers and reasoning for request per BMC Section 38.220.060.
Additional Subdivision
Preliminary Plat Supplement Reason for Waiver request
38.220.060.A.3
Groundwater
Groundwater levels are known on site from
groundwater monitoring conducted by C&H from the
spring of 2019 through the spring of 2020. De-watering
will be used within all utility trenches, and a high
groundwater note will be added to the plat.
38.220.060.A.4
Geology/Soils/Slopes
No unusual geologic features are present on the
subdivision site. There are no steep slopes.
38.220.060.A.5
Vegetation
No major vegetation types or critical plant species are
known to be present on this site.
38.220.060.A.6
Wildlife
No critical wildlife species or habitat are known to be
found on this property.
38.220.060.A.7
Historical Features
No historical features are present within the proposed
subdivision. No structures exist on the property.
38.220.060.A.19
Miscellaneous
No additional impacts or hazards are anticipated.
10. Parks and recreation facilities. The following information must be provided for all land
proposed to meet parkland dedication requirements:
a. Park concept plan, including:
(1) Site plan for the entire property; and
(2) The zoning and ownership for adjacent properties; and
(3) The location of any critical lands (wetlands, riparian areas, streams, etc.); and
(4) General description of land, including size, terrain, details of location and history,
water features, and proposed activities; and
(5) Description of trails or other recreational features proposed to connect the
proposed park area to other park or open space areas.
50
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 12 of 23
Blackwood Groves lies in proximity to several parks and open spaces (Appendix D), and the
park network imagined for the Blackwood Project would enhance the existing proximate
park system.
The vision for the Blackwood Groves park network is described within the Draft Parks
Master Plan (Appendix E).
b. If the applicant intends to request approval of cash-in-lieu, a response to the cash-in-lieu
review factors established by resolution of the city commission.
The preliminary parkland dedication calculations are provided in the Draft Parks Master
Plan (Appendix E). In accordance with section 38.420.020, the applicant must provide cash-
in-lieu (CIL) of additional parkland where the net residential density is in excess of 8
dwelling units per acre up to the maximum parkland net residential density of 12 dwelling
units per acre. The applicant intends to satisfy this CIL requirement with improvements-in-
lieu (IIL) of CIL. The preliminary calculations show that the planned improvements value
will far exceed the required CIL value. An initial review of relevant factors, and responses
to these factors, has been included below. Following the City’s review, additional
information can be supplied to verify these assumptions.
PROST Plan Chapter 8
• PROST Policy Statement 8.3.2 – Allows a cash donation in-lieu of land dedication credit
for the cost of constructing recreational trails if public access is provided. This project
will provide public access to the proposed recreational trails. The Applicant is also
requesting the City allow watercourse setbacks to be dedicated to the City as parkland
if part of a larger park area.
• PROST Cash-in-Lieu Criteria 8.4.3 – Establishes CIL Criteria, including those for Trail
Connections, as this is a key trail corridor improvement. Moreover, this project is in
proximity to several existing Parks (Appendix D) and will extend a key section of the
Gallagator Trail.
Resolution 4784
• Section 1 – Review Factors: Trails can be constructed within the required watercourse
setbacks (as is allowed by Code), which corresponds to the City’s adopted City-wide
Park Master Plan. The land proposed to meet the dedication requirement is
undesirable and unsuitable for the creation of City Parkland. The project is in proximity
to several park and other recreation facilities as shown in the exhibit included in the
appendices. Additionally, the extension of this trail will connect several of the onsite
parks to several other parks and recreation amenities. Finally, it is the expressed
preference of the developer to utilize improvements - and Cash-in-Lieu of land
dedication.
• Section 3 – Favorable Circumstances for acceptance of CIL or IIL: The development is
proposing to maintain the trails as is required, and is proposed as an infill mixed-use
51
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 13 of 23
project. Onsite recreation is provided to meet the needs of all onsite residents and
provides for active recreations opportunities (i.e. playground, open space amenities).
There are several parks within a half mile radius including Shady Lane Park and the
Alder Creek Subdivision Park. The site does have some environmental constraints
(wetlands), limiting the suitability of the site as has been previously described. The
request accomplishes other City Priorities, including the enhancement of the City’s
existing trail networks (consistent with the PROST Plan). Finally, this request is the
preference of the developer.
• Section 4 – Improvements in Lieu: The project is consistent with the City’s adopted
park master plan (PROST plan) for the location proposed. Further, the improvements
are consistent with the Construction requirements for class of proposed trails and
exceed the minimum UDC requirements for recreation pathways. The improvements
will serve residents of the development and all trail construction will conform to the
City’s procedures for installation of improvements as well as all adopted standards and
specifications.
12. Affordable housing. Describe how the subdivision proposes to satisfy the requirements of
division 38.380.
This response sets out one possible method of meeting the UDC standards. Upon
consultation with City of Bozeman and following review of this Pre-application, a formal
draft Affordable Housing Plan will be submitted to be reviewed with the Preliminary Plat
application. Delivery, construction, amenities, and marketing will be further defined in the
Affordable Housing Plan. The applicant may pursue incentives, and any such request is also
intended to be included in the Affordable Housing Plan submitted concurrently with the
Preliminary Plat application, the final version of which will be recorded with the Final Plat
for Phase 1.
The Applicant envisions constructing approximately 221 market-rate dwellings that are
subject to the affordable housing ordinance with a mix of bedrooms counts through the
course of full subdivision construction. Subsequently, the City’s Affordable Housing
Ordinance requires a percentage of this total to be constructed as affordable homes. The
Applicant is proposing to construct lower-priced homes, which will require total affordable
units to amount to 10% of the total market rate dwelling units that are subject to the
ordinance. In this case, the project would require the construction of 22.1 affordable units
(10% of 221 market rate homes).
To satisfy the development requirements of UDC Section 38.380, the Applicant is
proposing to provide 25 lower-priced homes, or 10 x 1-bedroom units and 15 x 3-bedroom
units, more than the required minimum. Review of the City’s adopted Community Housing
Action Plan and discussions with area affordable housing managers has indicated this
units count and mix represents possibly the most logical breakdown to meet community
specific housing needs.
The Applicant intends to build and sell the majority of these affordable homes within
52
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 14 of 23
Phase 1. The project team further intends to utilize cottage housing developments to build
the lower-priced homes, allowing the project to offer a unique housing type rarely utilized
for neighborhood building in Bozeman. As stated above, the Applicant would like to apply
cottage housing techniques to demonstrate this housing type can provide missing middle
housing of quality similar to the market-rate homes proposed within the subdivision.
The applicant fully understands what is required to construct cottage developments,
including the requirements for affordable housing, and is therefore proposing to create
several primary lots for future cottage developments through this subdivision. These
proposed primary lots are shown in Appendix K as Block 10 (Lots 1 and 2), Block 11 (Lots 1
and 2), and possibly Block 19 (Lots 1 – 4).
Each of these primary lots is envisioned to house one cottage housing development made
up of two clusters, each with 12 or fewer units, oriented around a common right-sized open
space. 60% of the cottage units will front on the respective cluster common open space.
Each cluster will be oriented around a common open space of sufficient size to meet the
UDC requirements. Affordable housing will also be provided as specified within the UDC for
each cottage development. The applicant will further describe the lot layout and design of
the cottage developments within the Preliminary Plat.
As the applicant intends to construct the majority affordable homes prior to complete
buildout of all Phases and market rate lots proposed for the subdivision, the Applicant
proposes to affirm at each phase that the effective affordable housing requirements
remain satisfied by the earlier phases of construction. Moreover, that Applicant will
demonstrate during each phase of development that the affordable homes represent as
similar as possible mix of bedrooms per unit as that of the market-rate homes in the
development.
13. Wildlife. Describe key wildlife habitat issues that may be associated with proposed
subdivision. Describe how the subdivision will consider fish and wildlife resources in the
course of project design. Describe subdivision early planning suggestions from local FWP
field biologists at FWP regional offices. This description should consider the following:
a. The species of fish and wildlife, including those designated as Species of Concern, that
use all or part of the project planning area (proposed subdivision site plus a one-half-mile
radius around it) on a year-round, seasonal, or periodic basis.
b. Existing vegetation, aquatic habitats, and wildlife habitats in the project planning area
(e.g., water bodies and their associated riparian habitat, big game winter range, native
grassland or shrub land habitats, areas used by black or grizzly bears).
c. The proposed subdivision’s potential impacts on wildlife and wildlife habitat, both
during construction and at full build-out, taking any applicable fish and wildlife habitat
standards into account.
53
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 15 of 23
The proposed subdivision is anticipated to have minimal impact on the surrounding wildlife.
The property is currently in agricultural production, and therefore does not contain any
native grasslands or forested areas. The are several existing agricultural water courses and
wetlands that run through property, including a small Cottonwood grove. The proposed
subdivision has been laid out to preserve these wetlands and watercourses to the greatest
extent possible.
At this time there are no known critical species that use this land as a permanent habitat. A
letter will be sent out to Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks during the preliminary plat process
asking them to comment on the proposed subdivision. BMPs will be followed during
construction to minimize impacts and pollution.
14. Waivers of right to protest. Include copies of or the recorded document numbers of all
existing waivers of right to protest special improvement districts or maintenance districts
which are applicable to the property proposed to be subdivided.
A Waiver of right to protest the creation of special improvements districts, and a waiver of
right to protest creation of a city-wide park maintenance district were recorded with the
annexation agreement for this development. A copy of the recorded document is included
with this submittal (Appendix J).
15. Water rights. Describe how the proposed subdivision intends to satisfy 38.410.130. Provide
documentation of all water rights appurtenant to the proposed subdivision; e.g. previous
payment-in-lieu of water rights, groundwater certificates, statements of claim, provisional
permits, decreed rights, canal or water users association shares etc.
The applicant is working with Brian Heaston on this matter to determine the required CILWR
amount required for this project. CILWR is expected to be paid with final plat approval and
site plan approval for each phase of the development.
54
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 16 of 23
IV. PROJECT SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR STAFF
Within the City Comments returned for this proposal, please address the following
project-related questions:
1. Please confirm that condominium ownership, as authorized by the MCA, is an allowed
ownership tool for the sale of affordable units required by UDC Sec. 38.380.
2. The proposed street sections along collector streets Blackwood Road, and S. 11th Ave show
the boulevard sidewalks along the commercial and residential lots in a location more centered
in the boulevard 6’ off of the property line, instead of the typical location 1’ off the property
line. This design creates a storefront and landscape amenity zone within the streetscape
which is consistent with the REMU intent to “encourage developments that exhibit the
physical design characteristics of vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented complete streets”
(Sec. 38.300.110.F.4.h). These amenity zones will promote creative storefront, patio, and
landscaping interactions within the public realm. The building-related amenity zones adjacent
to mixed-use buildings will “encourage a new neighborhood commercial center(s) with a
unique identity and strong sense of place” (Sec. 38.300.110.F.5.c). The proposed boulevard
widths will remain wide enough for boulevard trees and snow storage.
The applicant feels that the proposed collector street sections satisfy the minimum features
of the Recommended Collector Street Standards (Figure 9-14 of the Bozeman Transportation
Plan – 2007) while satisfying the aforementioned REMU standards. Does City staff concur with
this understanding?
3. For this project, please confirm variances will not be required for Blocks 6 and 7, where the
block width is less than 200’, as the design is essential to provide separation of residential
development from a traffic arterial (South 19th Avenue). This would be an allowed exception
to the block width requirements found in UDC Sec. 38.410.040.C. The residential development
imagined for this subarea of Phase 1 (Blocks 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, and 11) is unique, includes the
proposed affordable units, and has been designed to integrate with the parks and pathways
planned in adjacency. The design of Blocks 6 and 7 with a width of 160’ allows for a distinctive
neighborhood development that might otherwise be interrupted if a larger block width were
required and keeps this subarea of residential development protected from South 19th
Avenue.
4. Proposed Parks 4, 5, 12, 15, and 17 (see Appendix E) have been shown to meet the intent of
linear parks and are therefore proposed to be developed as such. For Parks 5, 12, 15, and 17,
direct pedestrian access is provided to the perimeters of these parks for the areas without
street frontage. Park 4 is to be an extension of the Gallagator Trail spur that lies to the east
of the park site. Please confirm the designation of these parks, and their unique design, as
linear parks negates the need for a subdivision variance for park frontage.
5. In accordance with Sec. 38.400.060, right-of-way widths for alleys are 20 feet. In alleys where
water and sanitary sewer mains are proposed include a 30-ft public utility easement which
extends 5 feet into the lots. Required building setbacks are greater than 5 feet and there are
no private utility easements along these alleys. Please confirm that this is acceptable (see
Block 8, Alley 1; Block 20, Alley 3; Block 22, Alley 4; and Block 23, Alley 5).
55
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 17 of 23
V. Response to Informal Comments (File No. 20-073)
The applicant submitted an Informal application in late 2019. City of Bozeman Staff provided comments
in April 2020, and the Applicant’s response to each comment is included below.
No. Comment Review
Entity
Response/Comments
1 The next step in the process includes a Pre-
application Subdivision Plan. Follow BMC 38.220.030
and 38.240.110. Please include a good discussion
and map on a phasing plan.
Planning The Pre-application narrative
includes a discussion on
phasing assumptions, while
the Phasing Plan has been
included as Appendix A.
2 BMC 38.330.020. Ensure compliance with special
standards for the REMU district
Planning The MSP (File No. 20-292) is to
be revised concurrent with
the Preliminary Plat submittal
to ensure compliance with the
REMU special standards.
3 BMC 38.360.110. With the formal submittal, include
how the project will follow these cottage housing
standards.
Planning This information can be found
in the previous narrative
section of this document.
4 BMC 38.400.120. Are there considerations to
accommodating transit within the community?
Planning Public transportation options
for future site service are
being pursued. The Applicant
will provide additional details
with the Preliminary Plat
submittal and with each
future phase of development.
5 BMC 38.410.020. A neighborhood center is required
within the development.
Planning A Neighborhood Center Plan
has been described Appendix
E.
6 BMC 38.410.030. Ensure lots meet this section. Planning All lots demonstrate
compliance with this section.
7 BMC 38.410.040. Ensure blocks meet this section. It
appears that some of the blocks are longer than 400
feet. Pedestrian access easements can act as a
midblock crossing. It requires a 30’ wide access
easement.
Planning The applicant is aware of this
requirement and has updated
all Pre-application Maps
accordingly (Appendix K). All
blocks longer than 400' are to
be separated by a mid-block
crossing with an appropriate
access easement.
8 BMC 38.410.100. Watercourse setback standards
must be adhered to. A minimum 50-foot setback is
required on both sides.
Planning Watercourse setbacks have
been shown as required on all
required plans.
9 BMC 38.420.060. Parkland must have a frontage
along 100 percent of its perimeter. If that cannot be
satisfied, no less than 50% of the park must have
frontage.
Planning See Appendix E, as well as the
subdivision variances
requested in the narrative
section above.
56
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 18 of 23
10 BMC 38.420.070. If the linear greenways are to be
considered linear parks, ensure that they meet this
section.
Planning Understood.
11 BMC 38.420.110. Identify transportation and
recreation pathways, their class, maintenance, etc.
The PROST Plan identifies a shared use path running
along Blackwood and trails running north south.
Planning See Appendix E.
12 BMC 38.510.030. Beyond the block frontages
identified in the narrative, the project will most likely
have to adhere to the following: 38.510.030.I.
Trail/park frontage
38.510.030.J Special residential
Planning The Community Design
Framework Master Plan,
included as an Appendix B,
identifies the proposed block
frontages for all lots.
13 BMC 38.510.030.L. With the submittal, include a map
that identifies the block frontage designations.
Planning The Community Design
Framework Master Plan,
included as an Appendix B,
identifies the proposed block
frontages for all lots.
14 BMC 38.520. Ensure compliance with Site Planning
and Design Elements. Make sure to identify the
following: Non-motorized circulation and design –
crosswalk material, pathway connection between
adjacent properties, pathway design, bicycle
facilities; Vehicular circulation and parking – any
internal roadway design; Open space – both
residential and commercial calculations
Planning Pedestrian and vehicular
access and circulation are
generally shown on the
enclosed Pre-application Map
(Appendix K) and will be
designed in more detail for the
Preliminary Plat submittal.
15 BMC 38.530. Ensure compliance with Building
Design. This more applies to commercial
development or any residential structure of 5 units
or more. Cottage housing follows BMC 38.360.110
and 1-4 household dwellings follow BMC 38.360.210.
Planning The applicant is aware of
these requirements and is
designing buildings according
to the regulations.
Confirmation of adherence to
these standards will be
confirmed through all future
site plan application review.
16 BMC 38.530.050.C. 19th and Blackwood Road is
considered a high visibility street corner. Ensure that
this section adheres to it.
Planning Understood.
17 BMC 38.550. Ensure compliance with Landscaping. Planning The Applicant is aware of this
requirement and has designed
the landscaping according to
the regulations.
1 The informal application lacks detail that would be
needed for a preliminary discussion regarding
wetland or other parkland waivers (i.e. Amount of
land requested for waiver and net area of
development). It is suggested that applicants wait
until pre-app for discussions with the subdivision
Parks & Rec See Appendix E.
57
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 19 of 23
review committee or Recreation and Parks Advisory
Board.
2 At subdivision, net residential density is considered
to be unknown, therefore the requirements of Sec.
38.420.020.A.2.a.(2) shall apply to this project within
REMU zoning district. Parkland shall be required
based on equivalent of 8 dwelling units per net acre
at the time of subdivision. Applicants may contact
the Park Planner prior to formal application with
proposed net lot area (as defined in 38.700.130) to
confirm parkland requirement.
Parks & Rec See Appendix E.
3 Upon subsequent development of individual lots,
parkland as Cash-in-lieu payment is required up to
equivalent of 12 dwelling units per acre. If applicants
propose to meet this maximum requirement at
subdivision with Improvements-in-lieu of Parkland,
the specific items used to meet the dollar value must
be individually identified and submitted for review
with the park master plan proposal.
Parks & Rec See Appendix E.
4 BMC Section 38.420. If cash-in-lieu of parkland will
be proposed for some or all of the land dedication at
the time of subdivision, please submit a request
addressing the criteria of Resolution 4784 and clearly
present required versus proposed parkland
contribution. Current appraisal value for Cash-in-lieu
is $1.60 per square foot but will be determined at the
time of Final Plat completeness. Values used at Pre-
app and Preliminary Plat are estimates. A new
appraisal is expected in September 2020.
Parks & Rec See Appendix E. Additional
information responding to the
Resolution 4784 is also
included above.
5 If a waiver of required park dedication is proposed in
accordance with 38.420.100, applicants must submit
their request including the amount of land requested
for waiver and describing the means for providing
land equal to or exceeding that required. See
Chapter 8.1 of the PROST Plan for additional review
considerations for wetland and other waivers
Parks & Rec See Appendix E. Additional
information responding to the
PROST Plan is also included
above.
6 Any reduction of parkland frontage as required in
38.420.060 must be specifically reviewed by the
Subdivision Review Committee with a
recommendation forwarded to the City Commission
for final approval. Please provide specific detail
about the percentage of reduction proposed, site
constraints and any mitigation elements from
38.420.060.A.2 are provided.
Parks & Rec See Appendix E.
7 DRC will determine recreation pathway
classifications at the time of pre-application in
accordance with 38.420.110.
Parks & Rec Understood.
58
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 20 of 23
8 Please include the following elements within Park
Master Plan: a. Statement addressing compliance
with relevant standards in Appendix C of the PROST
Plan; b. Sign plan as required in Appendix G of PROST
Plan, Section 38.420.080 BMC and including a
narrative regarding park name meeting the criteria in
Section D of the “Park-naming Policy” (see page 25
and 26 of pdf)
Parks & Rec See Appendix E.
9 All Park Master Plan proposals including CILP,
waivers, frontage reductions and PROST Plan
Compliance are reviewed by the Recreation and
Parks Advisory Board Subdivision Review Committee
or the entire Board. A meeting will be scheduled
upon submittal of a formal application.
Parks & Rec Understood.
1 Capacity study will be needed for this subdivision –
please contact NWE well in advance to investigate
(~6-12 months). Make sure to plan for 10ft
easement at front of lots to allow for 3PH backbone
and main gas line to be extended throughout
subdivision. Location of existing utilities to provide
backbone to the subdivision.
NWE The project team will
coordinate with NWE on the
utility layouts as we proceed
with subdivision design. 10'
utility easements are depicted
on all street frontages across
lots as shown in Appendix K.
2 Existing 3-phase overhead & 6” gas main along west
side of S 19th. Gas main is stubbed approx. 150 feet
north of Blackwood on the west side of S 19th St.
NWE Understood.
3 Existing sing phase conduit stub & 2” gas main stub
on the north side property boundary at S 15th Ave.
NWE Understood.
1 The subject property is located within the Meadow
Creek Subdivision payback district boundary for
traffic signal, water, and sewer improvements. The
applicant must pay the payback districts upon future
development. Reference document Gallatin County
Clerk and Recorder documents #2293491, 2293492,
and 2293493, respectively.
Engineering The applicant is aware of this
requirement. The applicant’s
understanding is that these
payments are to be made as
each phase of the
development is platted.
2 Montana Post-Construction Storm Water BMP
Design Guidance Manual Seasonal High
Groundwater - The subject project is located in an
area that is known to have seasonally high
groundwater. Engineering recommends that the
applicant confirm seasonal groundwater elevations
prior to development as this data can only be
obtained during several months of the year. Industry
guidance recommends a three-foot minimum
separation from the bottom of a stormwater facility
to the underlying groundwater table.
Engineering Groundwater monitoring data
has been collected from 2018-
2019 to verify SHGW
elevations. These
groundwater elevations will
be incorporated into the
subdivision design.
3 BMC 38.220.060 (A) (12) Traffic Generation - A traffic
impact study will be required upon future
development, which will need to provide the
information outlined in the BMC.
Engineering A Traffic Impact Study is
underway and will be
provided with the preliminary
plat submittal
59
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 21 of 23
4 BMC 38.400.010 Streets, General – South 19th Ave
must be fully constructed along the property’s
western boundary in accordance with the City’s
Transportation Master Plan upon future
development.
Engineering Understood.
5 BMC 38.400.110 Transportation Pathways – The
applicant is advised that the Gallagator Trail and S.
19th shared use paths must be constructed as
defined in the City Parks, Recreation, Open Space,
and Trails (PROST) Plan upon future development.
Engineering Understood.
6 BMC 38.410.040 Blocks - The applicant must
construct an appropriate local street grid through
the property that meets block length requirements
upon future development.
Engineering Understood.
7 City of Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications
Policy (DSSP) IV. Roadway Design and Technical
Criteria – All roadway plans must be designed in
conformance with the Montana
Public Works Standards and Specifications (MPWSS);
City of Bozeman Modifications to MPWSS;
Americans with Disabilities Act; and City of Bozeman
Sidewalk Policy. The applicant is advised to
review Table IV-2 within the DSSP to ensure all
proposed City streets meet the minimum street
design standards. Engineering does not have enough
information to adequately comment
Engineering Understood.
8 BMC 38.400.090 (D) (2) Access - Drive accesses on
collector streets must be at least 150 feet from an
intersection. The figure below highlights an access
that does not meet the City standard
at the intersection of Blackwood and 11th. The
applicant is advised to review all intersections to
ensure drive access meet City standards.
Engineering Understood. The open space
layout in this area has been
adjusted to remove this drive
access.
9 DSSP Section (V) (A) Main Size - The applicant is
advised that the subject property is located at the
southern end of the City’s main pressure zone
(Sourdough Zone). Water pressures around the
subject property vary from 35 to 50 psi. The water
distribution system must be designed to meet the
maximum day demand plus fire flow and the peak
hour demand requirements upon future
development. All additions to the water system will
be designed and installed in accordance with the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Circular 1; Montana Public Works Standards and
Specifications (MPWSS); City of Bozeman
Modifications to MPWSS; and the City’s most recent
Water Facility Plan
Engineering Understood. The water
system design will be provided
with the Preliminary Plat
submittal.
60
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 22 of 23
10 DSSP Section (V) (A) Main Size - A water design report
must be prepared by a professional engineering for
the proposed project. The water distribution system
must be designed to meet the maximum day
demand plus fire flow and the peak hour demand.
Engineering Understood. The water
system design will be provided
with the Preliminary Plat
submittal.
11 BMC 38.410.070 (A) (1) Municipal water, sanitary
sewer and storm sewer systems - The subject
property is located within the Cattail Creek Sanitary
Sewer Drainage Basin. The wastewater facility plan
identified the need for a future sanitary sewer
extension through the subject property (CIP
Reference: 12-inch South 3rd Ave – Goldenstein Ln
to S 19th & 18-inch S 19th Ave – South 3rd
intersection to Graf) that must be constructed upon
future development to serve the proposed area. All
sanitary sewer flows must be routed to the drainage
basin that serves the area as identified in the City of
Bozeman Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan. The
applicant is advised that the development must
complete and install the sanitary sewer extension
from the development’s southern property
boundary to the intersection of Graf & South 19th
upon future development.
Engineering The need for these sanitary
sewer main extensions has
been incorporated into the
subdivision design. We are
currently proposing to send a
portion of the sanitary sewer
flow for the project to Alder
Creek Subdivision through the
existing sewer main stub on S.
15th Ave. With the Master Site
Plan (MSP) submittal (File No.
20-292), the applicant
provided two (2) scenarios for
the sanitary sewer design for
the development for the city
to review. As comments are
available from the City’s
Engineering review of the
MSP, the applicant will amend
the MSP concurrent with the
Preliminary Plat application.
12 DSSP Section (V) (B) Sanitary Sewer System Design
Criteria - The applicant must provide an estimate of
the peak-hour sanitary sewer demand certified by a
professional engineer for the proposed project. The
City will analyze and determine if sewer capacity is
available to accommodate the project
Engineering A peak hour estimate was
provided with the MSP
submittal for review (File No.
20-292), and any amendments
to these estimates will be
submitted with the
Preliminary Plat and Master
Site Plan RC concurrent
applications.
13 BMC 38.410.130 Water rights - The applicant must
contact Brian Heaston with the City Engineering
Department to obtain a determination of cash-in-
lieu (CIL) of water rights upon future development.
Engineering Understood. A determination
of the CIL of water rights will
be provided with the
Preliminary Plat submittal.
14 BMC 38.410.100.A Watercourse Setback – Multiple
waterways exists throughout the subject property. If
the waterway conforms to the definition of the
watercourse setback per City code, then the
watercourse setback must be provided along both
sides of the waterway
Engineering Understood. Watercourses
requiring setbacks were
identified with the wetland
delineation for the project and
the setbacks are shown on the
attached Pre-application Map
(Appendix K).
15 DSSP - Standard Specifications for Lighting Materials
and Installation. Section II Definitions. A SILD will
need to be created prior to final plat approval for
maintenance of subdivision lighting.
Engineering Understood.
61
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Pre-Application
October 2020
Page 23 of 23
16 The applicant must submit plans and specifications
for water and sewer main extensions, streets, and
storm water improvements, prepared and signed by
a professional engineer (PE) registered in the State of
Montana, which must be provided to and approved
by the City Engineer. Water and sewer plans must
also be approved by the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality. The applicant must also
provide professional engineering services for
construction inspection, post-construction
certification, and preparation of mylar record
drawings. Construction shall not be initiated on the
public infrastructure improvements until the plans
and specifications have been approved and a
preconstruction conference has been conducted.
Building permits will not be issued prior to City
acceptance of the site infrastructure improvements
unless all provisions set forth in Section 38.270.030.C
of the Bozeman Municipal Code are met to allow for
concurrent construction.
Engineering Understood.
62
PRELIMINARY PLAT NARRATIVE
63
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 2 of 49
Table of Contents
NARRATIVE
Section I. – Project Team
Section II – Introduction
Section III – Subdivision Pre-Application Plan Narrative
Section IV – Response to Pre-Application Comments (File No. 20-377)
Section V – Response to Preliminary Plat Approval Criteria
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Phasing Plan
Appendix B: Block Frontages
Appendix C: Preliminary Plat Supplements
Appendix D: Vicinity Map Parks and Trails
Appendix E: Parks Master Plan
Appendix F: Covenant Location Exhibit
Appendix G: Residential Density Covenant
Appendix H: Commercial Area Restrictive Covenant
Appendix I: Park Restriction Covenant
Appendix J: Recorded Annexation Agreement
Appendix K: USGS Topo Map
Appendix L: ECCRS, Design Guidelines, & Bylaws
Appendix M: Affordable Housing Plan
Appendix N: Street Cross Sections
Appendix O: Wetland Delineation Report and Supporting Documents
Appendix P: Lighting Plan and Lighting Cut Sheets
Appendix Q: Impact Letters and Responses
Appendix R: Building Envelope Diagrams
Appendix S: Land Use Map
Appendix T: Project Schedule
64
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 3 of 49
Appendix U: Traffic Impact Study
Appendix V: Geotechnical Investigation Report
Appendix W: Water and Sanitary Sewer Design Reports
Appendix X: Stormwater Management Design Report
Appendix Y: Floodplain No-Rise Certification
Appendix Z: Preliminary Plat Certificate of Title
Appendix AA: Lot Guide (Blocks 9 & 26)
Appendix AB: Noxious Weed Management Plan
PLANS:
LANDSCAPE
Green Plan
Plan Sheets
L000 - Overall Site Plan
L001 - Notes & Legends
L002 - Notes & Legends
L300 - South 19th Avenue Planting
L301 - South 19th Avenue Planting
L302 - Blackwood Road Median Planting
L303 - Blackwood Road Median Planting
L304 - South 11th Avenue, Park 4, & Open Space A Planting
L305 - Open Space Planting
L306 - Open Space Planting
L307 - Park 1 Boulevard Planting
L308 - Park 1 Boulevard Planting
L309 - Park 2 Boulevard Planting
L310 - Park 3 Boulevard Planting
L311 - Park 6 & 7 Boulevard Planting
L312 - Park 8, 9, & 10 Boulevard Planting
L313 - Park 5 & 11 Boulevard Planting
L314 - Park 12 & 13 Boulevard Planting
65
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 4 of 49
L315 - Park 14, 15, & 16 Boulevard Planting
L500 - Landscape Details
L501 - Landscape Details
L600 - Overall Irrigation Plan
L601 - Well 1 & 2 Irrigation
L602 - Well 3 West Irrigation
L603 - Well 3 East Irrigation
L604 - Well 4 South Irrigation
L605 - Well 4 West Irrigation
L606 - Well 4 East Irrigation
L607 - Well 5 North/Central Irrigation
L608 - Well 5 South Irrigation
L609 - OS Areas
L700 - Irrigation Details
L701 - Irrigation Detail
CIVIL
Preliminary Plat and Associated Sheets
Preliminary Plat Exhibits
Phasing Exhibit
Street Exhibit
Utility Exhibit
Monitoring Well Location Map
Monitor Well Data
Sheet C.1.0 - Existing Site Conditions
Sheet C.2.0 - Zoning Map
Sheet C.3.0 - Existing Surface Water & Wetlands
Sheet C.4.0 - Construction Management Plan
Sheet C.5.0 - Water Utility Plan
Sheet C.6.0 - Sanitary Sewer Utility Plan
Sheet C.7.0 - Lot Layout
Sheet C.8.0 - Street Layout
66
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 5 of 49
I. PROJECT TEAM
OWNER & Blackwood Land Fund, LLC
APPLICANT 140 Village Crossing Way, Unit 3B
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.539.6015
PLANNER Intrinsik Architecture, Inc.
111 N. Tracy Avenue,
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.582.8988
PLANNER Design Workshop
17911 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92614
p: 949.851.2133
ARCHITECT Abramson Architects
5171 West Jefferson Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90016
p: 310.630.2126
ARCHITECT KTGY Architecture + Planning
1390 Lawrence Street, Suite 100
Denver, CO 80204
p: 303.623.5186
ENGINEER C&H Engineering and Surveying, Inc.
1091 Stoneridge Drive,
Bozeman, MT 59718
p: 406.587.1115
LANDSCAPE Design 5 Landscape Architecture
ARCHITECT 37 E. Main Street,
Bozeman, MT 59715
p: 406.587.4873
WATER & WETLAND TerraQuatic, LLC
CONSULTANT 614 W. Lamme Street,
Bozeman, MT 59715
P: 406.580.6993
67
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 6 of 49
Property Vicinity Map
II. INTRODUCTION
Blackwood Groves (“Blackwood Groves”, the “Neighborhood”, or the “Property”) is a 119.45-acre
property that is located to the south and west of the current terminus of South 11th Avenue and sits
directly south of Alder Creek Subdivision. Sacajawea Middle School comprises most of the eastern
boundary, whereas South 19th Ave acts as the Property’s western boundary. Blackwood Groves is
envisioned as a walkable, lifestyle-oriented, mixed-use community, which consists of a diverse set of
residents with a range of income and demographics, that also provides amenities and services to all
surrounding neighborhoods.
The Property, approximately 2.5 miles south of Downtown Bozeman, is situated with panoramic views
to the Bridger Range to the north, Gallatin Range to the east, Spanish Peaks and Madison Range to the
south, and Tobacco Root Mountains to the west. The community is specifically planned to embrace the
Property’s proximity, natural features, and stunning vistas to create a public realm that is seamlessly
connected to greater Bozeman but distinct in its inherent walkability and sense of place.
The neighborhood will coalesce around a dynamic center that is planned to serve as a hub of
community-oriented amenities; amenities such as restaurants, retail and commercial services,
entertainment, and recreational activities. This mixed-use hub of features and services will be
surrounded by a variety of housing types and price points, specifically intended to encourage a diverse
68
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 7 of 49
and dynamic mix of residents with a range of demographics and income levels. This is of particular
importance, given the proximity of significant education centers to the property – namely Sacajawea
Middle School, Morning Star Elementary, and Montana State University.
The residential and mixed-use town center neighborhoods within the Property are envisioned to be
interconnected by a series of parks, plazas, natural open spaces and biking/hiking trails that celebrate
the connection to the outdoors and encourage vehicles to be used as a last resort – instead of the first
(or more often, the only) option. This series of multi-modal connections throughout the Property, along
with well-planned and activated streetscapes, are intended to encourage a social atmosphere within
the community.
In June 2020, the Property was annexed into the City of Bozeman and underwent a Growth Policy
Amendment and Zone Map Amendment Review. Following those approvals, the property is now
classified as Residential Emphasis Mixed Use (REMU) zoning and future land use. This proposal shows
conformance with the UDC standards for development within this zone or clarifies when such necessary
information is to be provided (see below for additional Land Use Analysis). The Applicant has also
submitted a Master Site Plan application (File No. 20-292) to ensure the project is consistent with the
REMU standards and has received comments from the City of Bozeman in response to that application.
It is the intention of the project team to respond to the Master Site Plan comments, as well as update
that submittal, using the Revisions and Corrections process. The estimated project schedule for Phase
1 review of the subdivision is included as Appendix T.
69
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 8 of 49
Artist rendering looking northeast along a linear park corridor (Park 14)
Land Use Analysis
The Blackwood Groves neighborhood is to be developed under the existing Residential Emphasis Mixed
Use (REMU) zoning district. The site is larger than the five (5) acres minimum specified in the UDC and
is located adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods, which will help sustain Blackwood Groves
proposed commercial uses. The property is designated Residential Mixed Use on the current Future
Land Use Map, and the attributes of that designation further encourage neighborhoods sustainability
and community interconnectivity. Please see Alignment with Bozeman’s 2020 Community Plan, below,
for additional information on the alignment of this proposal with the City’s adopted Community Plan.
REMU zoning confers an expectation on future site development that the area will be mixed-use in
character and provide options for a variety of housing, employment, retail, and neighborhood services.
The neighborhood design of Blackwood Groves embodies this expectation. From the variety of housing
options proposed (Appendix S – Land Use Map) to the Town Center area envisioned in the heart of the
community providing employment and retail opportunities, this neighborhood strives to exceed the
REMU intent expectations established in the UDC.
While the walkable neighborhood will emphasize residential as the primary use, the inclusion of
community scale retail and services supports the overall neighborhood design and experience. A diverse
array of community scale commercial uses is envisioned for the Town Center area of the site, including
retail, restaurants, offices, maker spaces, grocery, small-scale cinemas, and fitness facilities (not to
exceed 30% of the total gross building square footage allowed within the REMU zoning standards).
Residential uses will also be heavily integrated into the upper floors of the Town Center.
The community has been designed to be complimented by vibrant, urban, and pedestrian-oriented
complete streets. The proposed street sections (Appendix N) provide for safe and broad connections
70
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 9 of 49
across and through the neighborhood, while the linkages enhance neighborhood's sense of place and
park experiences (Appendix E – Parks Master Plan). The proposed off- and on-streets connections
encourage pedestrian and bicycle travel, transit, on-street parking, and include the required physical
elements of complete streets. Natural spaces have been incorporated throughout the development to
serve the community needs for both neighborhood residents and visitors alike.
The streets of Blackwood Grove incorporate natural drainage technologies. On-street parking is planned
throughout the site, with back-in angled parking proposed adjacent to the Town Center area. Shared
access drives and alleys are proposed throughout the development to create a more vibrant public
realm as well as reduce the need for additional curb cuts. Buildings are to be oriented to the streets and
public spaces as is allowed in the BMC, and the proposed building envelopes have also been analyzed
for BMC compliance (Appendix R – Building Envelope Diagram).
The neighborhood seamlessly integrates complete streets to accommodate pedestrians, bicycles,
buses, automobiles and wintertime snow storage, and work in concert with internal property accesses
and adjacent development to create a connected and vibrant public realm. These streets are designed
to be community-oriented and pedestrian-friendly multimodal transportation routes. The
neighborhood also includes a significant number of public spaces that are intended to facilitate distinct
types of activities and encourage consistent human presence and activity. The proposed public parks
and recreational areas are inviting to everyone and have been designed to reflect the more connected
character imagined in the REMU zoning district.
Design standards that emphasize the sense of place and stipulate maintenance of the neighborhood
facilities have been created and these have been included in this submittal (Appendix L). The community
design intended for this community encourages thoughtful development while providing for providing
flexibility for future phases of the development to respond to changing market conditions. The design
standards and guidelines proposed for Blackwood Groves also include provisions that promote
sustainable development.
Initial land use assumptions for Blackwood Groves have been outlined in Table 1. For additional details
on the precise parkland assumptions for Blackwood Groves, including discussion of CILP, please
reference the Parks Master Plan (Appendix E). Condominiums are to be developed within the
Blackwood Groves subdivision, and the location and design of these condo units will be proposed for
review under future Site Plan and Condominium review applications as that development plan is
assembled. No Planned Unit Developments are anticipated, and no manufactured homes, or RV parks
are to be developed within this neighborhood.
Table 1: Blackwood Groves Land Use Table
Use Proposed Land Area (square feet)
Single Household 30.02 Acres (1,307,845 sf)
Multi-Household* 17.35 Acres (755,777 sf)
Commercial (Mixed Use)* 16.42 Acres (715,627 sf)
Parkland 18.51 Acres (806,296 sf)
Open Space 3.42 Acres (149,017 sf)
ROW/Easements/Streets 33.72 Acres (1,468,682 sf)
TOTAL 119.45 Acres (5,203,242 sf)
* = Type of structures and number of units to be determined at Site Plan.
71
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 10 of 49
Alignment With Bozeman’s 2020 Community Plan
Artist rendering looking southeast at the intersection of Cambridge Drive and Spring Ridge Drive
Bozeman’s newly minted 2020 Community Plan designates this parcel as Residential Mixed-Use on the
Future Land Use Map. This Future Land Use category promotes neighborhoods that are largely
residential in nature but integrate small-scale commercial and civic uses. A mix of housing types and
densities is suggested under this category, and it further encourages that all uses should complement
planned residential ones. Non-residential uses are expected to be pedestrian oriented and emphasize
the human scale. Commercial centers are envisioned within this category, especially those served by
multi-modal transit. Non-residential spaces should provide an interesting pedestrian experience with
quality urban design for buildings, sites, and open spaces. Under this category commercial
neighborhood centers and pedestrian oriented open spaces are highly encouraged. As has been
described herein, this project decidedly fits the framework established under the Residential Mixed-
Use category described within the Community Plan.
The following additional themes and goals of the Community Plan have been incorporated into the
overall project design and demonstrate how the proposed development aligns with this foundational
community document. Examples that illustrate how specific components of this project support the
growth policy have also been included to provide further evidence of the suitability of this
neighborhood within Bozeman.
1. Theme 1 - A Resilient City
The Neighborhood has been intentionally designed to mitigate future natural hazard and climate
change impacts. The property is not shown within the mapped wildlands-urban interface (WUI) in
Gallatin County’s effective Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Hazard Mitigation Plan, or GIS
mapping resources. While this location is outside the effective WUI, the neighborhood will still be
72
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 11 of 49
designed to minimize potential future fire risk through the utilization of fire-resistant materials
and landscaping where practical.
Blackwood Groves has also been developed in consultation with the 2020 Climate Plan. Blackwood
Groves is envisioned to be an equitable and resilient low-carbon community for current and future
generations. In line with the Plan’s Guiding Principles, the application of renewable energy is
encouraged through the Design Guidelines and solar orientation of project. The Neighborhood
also includes innovative mechanisms to address climate change, such as the interactive tree
groves found in Parks [3], 9 and 10 that will effectively serve to sequester compounding carbon as
the groves age (see Appendix E - Parks Master Plan, Page 13). The linear parks and pathways
described in the Parks Master Plan further advance multimodal transit opportunities for residents
and visitors alike, weaving resilience and sustainability into the design of neighborhood by
encouraging walkability and significantly reducing the need for vehicles.
Figure 2: Proposed Road Alignment Avoiding Wetland Areas
Blackwood Groves was designed with a focus on preserving the natural elements that exist within
the property. For example, an existing tree grove has been designed as a community park with
organic playground materials and water features planned adjacent to it (Park 3). Importantly,
73
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 12 of 49
there is an existing wetland that runs near the eastern border of the site. While 11th Avenue was
originally designed to cut through the widest area of the wetland (per the City’s long range
Transportation Plan), the Project Team worked closely with City staff to shift 11th westward to
limit any impacts on this important natural element (See Figure 2, above). This has a secondary
benefit of providing for spectacular views for pedestrians as it aligns with views of the Bridgers
and Spanish Peaks ranges.
The sustainable neighborhood design employed for Blackwood Groves also includes community
agriculture options. Compact and diverse housing is proposed in portions of the neighborhood, as
well as mixed-use development opportunities that allow for individuals to live and work in
proximity to each other. The roadway design, as discussed above, intentionally avoids wetlands
and floodplains to provide regenerative green spaces that protect natural systems. Moreover, the
street and park designs provide an extensive but diverse array of transit options through and
across the Property.
Figure 3: Green Plan (See also Appendix E)
2. Theme 2 - A City of Unique Neighborhoods
Homesites and residential units have been designed to take advantage of unique vistas, solar
orientation opportunities, and the ability to create a unique, but Bozeman-appropriate,
neighborhood. For example, angled homesites were utilized in some areas in order to take
74
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 13 of 49
advantage of views overlooking the Bridger and Gallatin ranges as well as community parks. Floor
plans for these units allow for a variety of bedroom counts, while activating important collector
streets and providing for a unique streetscape.
3. Goal N-1: Support well planned, walkable neighborhoods
Blackwood Groves was planned – from its original concept designs – as a walkable, pedestrian-
oriented community. The broader goal for this project is to be a “park once” community, after
which all residents and guests can easily and safely walk or bike ride to each neighborhood and
amenity. Importantly, Blackwood Groves was thoughtful in its planning for access for students
attending Sacajawea Middle School and Morningstar Elementary. Children commuting back and
forth to school may utilize the linear parks and trail systems within these parks as a safer means of
access. All critical crossings have been thoughtfully designed and include bulb-outs for additional
pedestrian safety. Lastly, community-oriented commercial services are planned at the heart of the
project, which will allow residents and guests to easily walk or bike ride to amenities and services
instead of being required to get in a vehicle. See Appendix N - Street Sections and Appendix E –
Parks Master Plan for additional information.
4. N-1.1 Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing.
Particularly given its location within an education hub, Blackwood Groves was envisioned as a
“melting pot” community that includes a wide range of residential product types and price points.
Instead of catering to a single demographic with homogenous product offerings, this community
will seek to provide a wide range of housing options from affordable cottages, to townhomes,
condos and apartments, to custom single family homesites – and everything in between. See
Appendix M - Affordable Housing Plan for additional details.
5. N-1.5 Encourage neighborhood focal point development with functions, activities, and facilities
that can be sustained over time. Maintain standards for placement of community focal points and
services within new development.
The Blackwood Groves neighborhood provides four distinct neighborhood centers. The locations
are easily recognizable and will feature a gathering space and plaza that is easily accessible. See
Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional information on the proposed neighborhood
centers.
6. N-1.6: Encourage urban agriculture as part of focal point development, in close proximity to
schools and near dense or multi-unit housing.
Several Open Space areas throughout the community are envisioned to include urban agriculture
uses such as shared community gardens. Most of these sites are within the cottage communities
and adjacent to the higher-density multifamily product. See Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for
additional information on the proposed community garden.
7. N-1.9 Ensure multimodal connections between adjacent developments
75
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 14 of 49
Each neighborhood within the broader Blackwood Groves project will be interconnected to each
other and to the town center via a series of linear parks, green connections, and open spaces
(most of which include bulb-outs for safe crossing of streets). These corridors continue to the edge
of the development such that they can be easily connected to and extended upon future
development of the surrounding properties. In addition, planned trails and loops that run
throughout the property will be included in maps and signage for Fitness Trails, Safe Routes to
School, to Parks and for wayfinding to the commercial services. Bike lanes have been thoughtfully
incorporated along important connection routes to further these multimodal connections. See
Appendix N - Street Sections and Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional information on
proposed connections.
8. N-1.10: Increase connectivity between parks and neighborhoods through continued trails and
sidewalk development. Prioritize closing gaps within the network.
All neighborhoods and parks will be interconnected by a series of green connections, linear parks,
and open spaces. The overarching goal is to create a full and safe circuit for residents and
members of the community. In any area where a required City street conflicted with one of these
connections, bulb-outs are provided to ensure a short and safe crossing area. See Appendix N -
Street Sections, Appendix E – Parks Master Plan, and the Preliminary Plat for additional
information.
9. N-2.5 Ensure that new development includes opportunities for urban agriculture, including
rooftop and home gardens, community gardens, or urban farms.
See response to N-1.6 and Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional information on the
proposed community gardens.
10. Goal N-3: Promote a diverse supply of quality housing units.
Blackwood Groves has been envisioned as a pedestrian-oriented community with a diverse
residential base. To deliver on this vision, a wide range of residential product types and price
points will be delivered – from affordable for-sale and rental cottages, to townhomes, condos, and
apartments of various sizes, to small and large custom single family homesites – and everything in
between. See Appendix M - Affordable Housing Plan for additional details.
11. N-3.3 Encourage distribution of affordable housing units throughout the City with priority given to
locations near commercial, recreational, and transit assets.
Blackwood Groves intends to exceed the affordable housing provisions required by the City. While
22 lower-priced affordable homes are required per the Blackwood Groves plan, 26 affordable
homes are being proposed. Further, each of these affordable homes are located within a short
walk of Sacajawea Middle School, several parks as well as the proposed town center. See
Appendix M - Affordable Housing Plan for additional details.
12. N-3.7 Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes, and small floor plans, especially through
76
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 15 of 49
mechanisms such as density bonuses.
Blackwood Groves’ residential plan includes a wide mix of unit types and sizes. Several
neighborhoods with small lots are proposed, along with several Cottage Communities (per the
City’s Cottage Ordinance). The preliminary plat shows the wide variety of residential lot sizes and
uses, also see Appendix M - Affordable Housing Plan for additional details.
13. N-3.8 Promote the development of "Missing Middle" housing (side by side or stacked duplex,
triplex, live-work, cottage housing, group living, rowhouses/ townhouses, etc.) as one of the most
critical components of affordable housing.
Blackwood Groves is envisioned to include a variety of product types including duplex units,
stacked flats, apartments, cottage homes, rowhouses, townhouses, condos and custom
homesites. These are viewed as critical to the long-term success of the project to promote a
diverse and dynamic community that provides for a variety of housing options – especially for
young families with children attending the nearby schools. See Appendix M - Affordable Housing
Plan for additional details.
14. Goal N-4: Continue to encourage Bozeman’s sense of place.
The Blackwood Groves community was envisioned and planned with significant use of outdoor
amenities and activities, which Bozeman is well known for. Located along the Gallagator Trail,
numerous large parks are planned alongside the trail and its existing wetland features. A variety of
housing types are included within the project, including generational housing that allows different
types of families to live together within a single unit. The project is oriented to take advantage of
the spectacular views of the Bridgers, Spanish Peaks and Gallatin ranges and is scaled to largely
provide a neighborhood feel.
15. N-4.4 Ensure an adequate supply of off-leash facilities to meet the demand of Bozeman dog
owners.
Dog owners will have several off-leash facilities purpose-built and designed for their needs.
Several dog parks are planned within parks and open spaces at Blackwood Groves to ensure their
needs are met. See Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional information on the proposed
off-leash amenities.
16. Theme 3 - A City Bolstered by Downtown and Complimentary Districts
The vision of Blackwood Groves is to create its own district that compliments other significant
districts in Bozeman. The goal and vision are not to eliminate the desire to travel to other districts
in the City; but instead to create a variety of great local uses and commercial services, while not
directly competing with other areas.
17. Goal DCD-3: Ensure multi-modal connectivity within the City.
Blackwood Groves will have full connectivity for pedestrians and bikes via a series of linear parks,
77
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 16 of 49
green connections, shared use paths, and bike lanes. The Gallagator Trail runs along the eastern
border of the site, which connects to Downtown Bozeman. A full park and trail system is planned
for the Gallagator Trail within Blackwood Groves. One of the premier parks within the community
will house the trail system. In addition, two significant collector streets – 11th Avenue and
Blackwood Road – run through the site, connecting it directly to the broader Bozeman community.
18. DCD-3.3: Identify major existing and future destinations for biking and walking to aid in
prioritization of route planning and completion.
Blackwood Groves was designed around a few key features, both on site and off site, namely, a
stream corridor, existing tree grove, nearby assets like Sacajawea Middle School and Morningstar
Elementary, and continuing key connections along the collectors of Blackwood and 11th. The site
was designed to enhance each one of these elements and the site plan allows for multiple
connections to each one of these key features. See Appendix N - Street Sections and Appendix E –
Parks Master Plan for additional information on proposed connections.
19. Theme 4 A City Influenced by Our Natural Environment, Parks, and Open Lands.
The initial planning for Blackwood Groves was based on the premise of preserving a
preponderance of the site’s natural elements. A large existing grove of trees will be preserved
with a large community park planned around it. An existing wetland running along the eastern
portion of the site (adjacent to the future extension of the Gallagator Trail) is being preserved as
much as possible. While 11th Ave was intended to run through the widest portion of the wetland,
Blackwood Groves is shifting 11th Ave to the west slightly to allow the important collector street to
run through the narrowest portion – minimizing any impact on the wetland itself (See Figure 2,
above). Lastly, the view corridors of the nearby mountain ranges are enhanced as several streets
are proposed to be shifted away from a strict grid, which allows for direct views of both the
Bridger and Spanish Peaks ranges.
20. Goal EPO-1: Prioritize strategic acquisition of parks to provide a variety of recreational
opportunities throughout the City.
The project is incorporating a significant number of parks and open spaces throughout the
community. Amenities are proposed for each park, all of which were thoughtfully designed with
specific uses in mind based on the nearest residential product types. For instance, in areas where
many young families are anticipated to live, playgrounds and play areas for children are proposed.
In higher density residential areas, off-leash dog parks, scavenger hunts and outdoor working
areas are proposed. In addition, several fitness loops are proposed with organic fitness equipment
and stations throughout the project. See Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional
information on the proposed parks.
21. EPO-1.3: Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational and artistic elements into parks.
The proposed Blackwood Groves parks incorporate several unique and inclusive elements
78
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 17 of 49
throughout the entire development. Neighborhood parks provide active features with scavenger
hunts, nature play features, playground equipment, community gardens, dog parks and fitness
stations to serve a wide variety of age groups throughout the neighborhood. The existing mature
trees are being preserved and incorporated into Park 3 to create a unique, interactive park space
adjacent to residential uses and the community’s town center. See Appendix E – Parks Master
Plan for additional information on the proposed parks.
22. EPO-1.5: Work with partner organizations to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk,
environmentally sensitive areas to contribute to water quality, wildlife corridors, or wildlife
habitat, specifically wildlife habitat as we continue outward growth.
Blackwood Groves was designed with a focus on preserving the natural elements that exist within
the property. Natural watercourse corridors are being maintained with 50-ft wetland setbacks
provided on both sides to create a minimum 100-ft corridor along the site’s natural watercourses.
The existing tree grove is being preserved and incorporated into Park 3. Importantly, there is an
existing wetland that runs near the eastern border of the site. While 11th Avenue was originally
designed to cut through the widest area of the wetland (per the City’s long range Transportation
Plan), we worked closely with City staff to shift 11th westward to limit any impacts on this
important natural element. See Figure 2, above.
23. EPO-2: Work to ensure that development is responsive to natural features.
The master planning efforts for Blackwood Groves began with identification of important natural
features of the site – namely, an existing grove of trees, a wetland on the eastern portion of the
project, and amazing views of the nearby ranges. These features shaped the initial planning for
streets and parks. 11th Ave was shifted westward to protect as much of the wetland as possible
and minimize the impact on this important feature. Through this shift, 11th Ave and Spring Ridge
were re-aligned to ensure perfect views of the Bridger and Spanish Peaks ranges – both for
pedestrians walking along the sidewalks as well as for drivers. Lastly, the grove of trees is being
preserved and enhanced as part of a park itself that will take advantage of the beautiful natural
features with organic playground equipment.
24. EPO-3: Address climate change in the City’s plans and operations.
See response #1 above.
25. EPO-3.2: Ensure complete streets and identify long-term resources for the maintenance of year-
round bike and multi-use paths to improve utilization and reduce annual per capita miles traveled.
Long-term maintenance and snow removal were thoughtfully designed into each street, alley and
park and green connection throughout the project. Specific requirements and maintenance plans
will be addressed within the Master Covenant (CCR’s) and Design Guidelines (Appendix L). Bike
and multi-use paths will be maintained and able to be used year-round.
26. EPO-3.3: Support water conservation, use of native plants in landscaping, and development of
79
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 18 of 49
The project proposes to use native and drought-tolerant plants where practical (and allowed
under City standards). Watercourse plantings along the site’s natural watercourses will also be
provided. Parks and open spaces will be irrigated with exempt irrigation wells using efficient
watering techniques and technologies to promote water conservation. See Appendix E – Parks
Master Plan for additional information on the proposed plantings and irrigation plan.
27. EPO-3.10: Inclusion of community gardens, edible landscaping, and urban micro-farms as part of
open spaces outside of watercourses and wetlands in subdivision is encouraged where
appropriate.
Several neighborhoods are envisioned to include community gardens. For example, Park 5 and the
Cottage Communities proposed in Phase I include a garden area for residents to plant and harvest
edible landscaping and urban micro-farms. See Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional
information on the proposed community gardens.
28. Goal 5 A City that Prioritizes Accessibility and Mobility Choices.
While the project has been designed with safe streets and access for pedestrians and bikers, it is
also comprehensively planned for auto vehicles with sufficient parking throughout. Street sections
have been reviewed with City Staff to ensure compliance with all City needs. In addition, the Parks
Master Plan, including linear parks, provides for easy and safe pedestrian and bike connections
throughout the project.
29. Goal M-1: Ensure multimodal accessibility.
The master planning efforts for the entire community considered pedestrians and bike riders first
and foremost. The goal was to allow for a “park once” community, where residents and members
of the community could arrive at the project and only return to their car when they need to leave
the community. But once on-site, easy pedestrian access would be the primary focus. That said,
vehicle access and parking will be sufficient based on current requirements and public
transportation is currently envisioned to be added to our future town center to allow for easy
access to Montana State University and other areas of the City. See Appendix N - Street Sections
and Appendix E – Parks Master Plan for additional information on proposed connections.
30. M-1.5: Identify locations for key mobility hubs (e.g. rideshare drop off/pick up areas, bike/scooter
share, transit service, bike, and pedestrian connections)
A mobility hub will be incorporated into the future Town Center within Blackwood Groves.
Discussions have been held with HRDC for a Streamline bus route directly to the core of the
property – particularly with the project’s location within an education hub in mind (Montana State
University, Sacajawea Middle School and Morningstar Elementary School).
31. M-2.5: Develop safe crossing along priority and high utilization pedestrian and biking corridor.
All infrastructure proposed within the project includes safe paths for pedestrians and bikers. The
80
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 19 of 49
Street Sections proposed throughout the project include either separate bike lanes or shared use
lanes. In addition, Safe Routes to School with specific signage will be incorporated through the
linear parks and green connections that will afford a safe passage to Sacajawea from each
neighborhood within the broader project. Linear parks and green connections include bulb-outs at
intersections to provide a short and safe crossing.
81
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 20 of 49
III. SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
The Preliminary Plat application must include the following information:
1. Complete and signed development review application Form A1.
The A1 form has been included with this submittal.
2. Project narrative describing the project type, proposed use scope, type of buildings, and intent.
The narrative must include a response to the City’s pre-app plan review comments.
The narrative is included above and the response to the City’s Pre-application Comments is included
at the end of this document.
3. If the overall development plan is to be developed in phases, provide a phasing plan.
The Phase Plan has been included as Appendix A. A project schedule has also been submitted as
Appendix T.
4. A written statement describing any requested subdivision variance(s) and the facts of hardship
upon which the request is based. Refer to 38.250.080, BMC and the SVAR Checklist.
This subdivision has not requested any variances.
5. Covenants, Restrictions, and Articles of Incorporation for the Property Owners’ Association.
A draft of the Covenants, Restrictions, and Articles of Incorporation for the Property Owners’
Association has been included as Appendix L.
6. Encroachment permits or a letter indicating intention to issue a permit where new streets,
easements, rights-of-way or driveways intersect State, County, or City highways, streets or roads.
Encroachment permits are not anticipated for this project. The Montana Department of
Transportation (MDT) has indicated that this section of South 19th Avenue is covered under a
Citywide Agreement between the City of Bozeman and MDT classifying this section as an urban
route that will not require an encroachment permit.
7. A letter of approval or preliminary approval from the City of Bozeman where a zoning change is
necessary.
This item is not applicable to this subdivision submittal.
8. Provision of maintenance of all streets (including emergency access), parks, and other required
improvements if not dedicated to the public or if private.
82
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 21 of 49
All streets, parks, and other required public improvements will be dedicated to the public and the
provision for maintenance will be stated on the final plat for each future phase.
9. A Noxious Weed Management and Revegetation Plan approved by the Weed Control District for
control of noxious weeds.
The required plan has been included as Appendix AB.
10. A preliminary platting certificate prepared by a Montana title company.
The required certificate has been included as Appendix Z.
11. A draft of such other appropriate certificates.
All required certificates have been included.
12. Profile sheets for street grades greater than five percent.
No street grades greater than five percent are proposed.
13. Property owners’. A certified list of adjoining property owners’, their mailing addresses and
property description, including property owners’ across public rights-of-way and/or easements.
The list of adjoining owners’ has been included with this submittal.
14. When a subdivision does not qualify for the certification established in 38.240.100, the subdivider
must provide information regarding sanitation set forth in MCA 76-3-622.
The subdivision qualifies for the certification established in 38.240.100.
15. List of waivers granted from the requirements of 38.220.060, BMC during the pre-application
process.
No waivers from the requirements of Plat Supplements called for UDC Sec. 38.220.060 were granted
during the Pre-application process, therefore the required supplements have been included in the
Preliminary Plat Supplements document located in Appendix C.
83
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 22 of 49
IV. Response to Pre-Application Comments (File No. 20-377)
Replying to the Pre-application Comments provided by City Planning Staff on December 8, 2021, the
following responses are included in this Preliminary Plat submittal. The Table of Contents also provides
additional direction to relevant response materials.
No. Comment Review Entity Response/Comments
The applicant is advised that unmet code provisions,
or code provisions that are not specifically listed as
conditions 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.
Planning Understood.
1 The subject property has not gone through
subdivision review pursuant to the Montana
Subdivision and Platting Act. Potential impacts of
development on the site have not been analyzed.
Based on the preliminary nature of the plat the DRC
does not grant any of the waivers to the
supplemental information under 38.220.060, BMC
with this pre-application plan review application.
Planning All information required by
the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act, and all
supplemental information
required under BMC
38.220.060 have been
included in this submittal.
Please see the Table of
Contents (above) for more
precise details on the location
of the supplemental plat
information.
2 BMC 38.410.030.D. The pedestrian access easement
through Block 1, 13, 14, 24 should be designated as
a tract/lot. Ensure that the setbacks are met with
the site plan (10 foot path = 15 foot setback to
buildings). On the green plan, this easement
appears to be going directly through a building or
parking lot. The green plan needs to reflect the plat
and it is advised that the buildings are removed from
the plan.
Planning The pedestrian access
easements have been
updated on the Preliminary
Plat and on the Green Plan.
84
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 23 of 49
3 BMC 38.410.030.A & H – Lot designs with irregular
shapes are not permitted and the side lot lines must
be substantially right angles. The lots on Block 9 and
26 need to be revised.
Planning As detailed further within
Appendix AA, angled
homesites are utilized in
some areas to take advantage
of views overlooking the
Bridger and Gallatin ranges as
well as significant community
parks and open spaces. In
addition, these units take
advantage of Solar Gain
Orientation. Floor plans for
these units allow for a variety
of bedroom counts, while
activating important collector
streets and providing for a
unique streetscape.
4 All lots that front onto a greenway corridor requires
a sidewalk through the park/open space to meet
frontage. A maintenance agreement with the Parks
Department should be provided that addresses who
is in charge of maintaining the sidewalk/pathway.
Planning All lots that front onto a
greenway corridor are shown
adjacent to a sidewalk to
provide for frontage for these
lots. A maintenance
agreement will be provided
concurrent with the Final Plat
submittal.
5 The cottage housing portion of the development
can be included within the preliminary plat,
however, provide additional supplement materials
using 38.360.110 for the cottage housing blocks.
Ensure that it is separate document that identifies
all the standards within the code section. The
following also apply:
i. There needs to be clarity on the utilities,
services, and easements.
ii. Identify the larger lots in the cottage
housing development.
iii. The design standards (38.360.110.G) can
be part of preliminary plat or as a future site plan
application
Planning The cottage primary lots are
proposed to be subdivided by
a future subdivision
exemption application. The
Affordable Housing Plan
included herein (Appendix
M) provides initial details on
the possible cottage layout.
Additional information will be
included with the subsequent
Master Site Plan and Site Plan
applications.
6 Correct any notes on the plat that state location is
approximate with location to be finalized with final
plat.
Planning All plats notes have been
updated to reflect the final
nature of the relevant notes.
7 The preliminary plat must conform to all
requirements of the Bozeman Municipal Code and
the Uniform Standards for Subdivision Plats Uniform
Standards for Certificates of Survey (COS) and
Subdivision Plats (24.183.1104 ARM).
Planning The Preliminary Plat
conforms to all necessary
BMC and Uniform Standards
for Subdivision Plat.
8 The supplemental documents outlined in BMC
38.220, part 2 are deemed required with this
application as there are common facilities including
city parkland, open space and the associated
Planning All draft supplemental
documents required by the
BMC have been included in
this submittal. Please see the
85
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 24 of 49
stormwater facilities, rights of ways for pedestrians
and perimeter street public lands landscaping
required that is the responsibility of the property
owners’ association to own (open space) and
maintain (all). The plat must clearly state
maintenance responsibilities for these facilities and
the supplementary documents must be provided in
draft form with the preliminary plat application.
Table of Contents for the
precise location of the
required supplemental items.
The plat clearly states the
maintenance responsibilities
for all facilities.
9 Section 38.400.020 - Street and road dedication.
Any private street must include documented proof
of adequate funding and scheduling for
maintenance of all private streets, must be
provided.
Planning No private streets are
proposed for this
development.
10 Section 38.400.080 - Sidewalks. City standard
sidewalks (including a concrete sidewalk section
through all private drive approaches) must be
constructed in all developments on all public and
private street frontages, except for alleys. The
requirements of the city design standards and
specifications policy and the city modifications to
state public works standard specifications and per
the block frontage standards of division 38.510
apply. Sidewalks adjacent to public lands. The
developer must install sidewalks adjacent to public
lands, including, but not limited to, parks, open
space, and the intersection of alleys and streets or
street easements. Applicable sidewalks and
development frontages adjacent to public lands are
subject to the provisions of section 38.510.030.I.
Planning City standard sidewalks will
be installed per all applicable
standards.
11 Section 38.400.070 – Street Lighting. Provide street
lighting plans consistent with Section 38.570.030
compliant with the City of Bozeman Design
Standards and Specifications Policy to be
incorporated into an SILD to be reviewed by the City
Commission.
Planning Street Lighting Plans have
been included in this
submittal, plans consistent
with the BMC, City Design
Standards and Specifications
Policy that will allow for
incorporation into a future
SILD. Please see Appendix P.
12 Section 38.400.110.C - Recreation pathways. For the
definition of recreation pathways, please see
section 38.420.110.B. For lots proposed to front on
pedestrian pathways specify whether this pathway
is a transportation pathway or recreation pathway
included in parkland or open space boundaries.
Planning The Parks Master Plan
specifies the typology of
pathways proposed for this
neighborhood. Please see
Appendix E for additional
information.
86
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 25 of 49
13 Section 38.400.120 – Public Transportation. All
interior and exterior development streets that are
designated as transit routes must be designed to
accommodate transit vehicles and facilities. If any
streets on the interior or exterior of the
development are designated as transit routes, the
review authority may require the developer to
provide transit facilities such as transit stop signage,
benches, bike racks, lighting and bus shelters.
Coordinate best practices with Taylor Lonsdale, the
City’s transportation engineer.
Planning The applicant is coordinating
with Streamline on a
potential bus stop in close
vicinity to the Town Center.
All streets will be built to City
standards and will be able to
accommodate public
transportation.
14 Section 38.410.020 – A neighborhood centers must
be identified and should be no less than one acre in
size. Although a number of common areas are
proposed staff is unable to determine if these areas
will meet the standards herein.
Planning The Parks Master Plan
includes details on the
proposed design, location,
and phase of development.
Please see Appendix E for
additional information.
15 Section 38.410.030.E - Frontage. Unless otherwise
allowed by this chapter, all lots must have frontage
in compliance with section 38.400.090.B to provide,
among other things, adequate room for snow
removal, lot access and utility easements. Provide
direct frontage and connection to a sidewalk for all
lots along exterior roadways. Written approval from
the utility company is required if an alternative
easement is proposed (i.e. cottage housing).
Planning All lots show proper frontage
as required by the BMC.
Cottage housing and the
associated easements will be
developed in consultation
with the utility company.
16 Section 38.410.040.D - Rights-of-way for
pedestrians. Landscape and irrigation plans must be
submitted with the preliminary plat application for
the required landscaping in these rights of ways
with the preliminary plat. This area must provide
trees at one per every fifty feet in place of street
trees. Utilize species recommendations for street
trees. Maintenance of these rights of ways is the
responsibility of the property owners’ association
and must be represented in the POA documents
required in BMC 38.220 part 2.
Planning All blocks will include
required rights-of-way, with
final location to be
determined with the Site
Plan.
17 Section 38.410.080 - Grading and drainage.
Stormwater facilities must be provided for the
public streets. All lots provided to accommodate
stormwater from the public streets must be titled
“open space” lots with the correct lot and block
number depending on location. The open space lots
must be maintained by the POA and noted
accordingly in the documents required in BMC
38.220 part 2 and on the conditions of approval
sheet of the plat. BMC 38.410.080 outlines the
requirements for stormwater drainage facilities
including landscape design if s surface facility is
proposed. Landscape and irrigation plans must be
Planning All stormwater facilities will
be located on open space
parcels with public access and
maintenance easements.
87
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 26 of 49
submitted with the preliminary plat application for
the required landscaping in all open space lots.
18 Section 38.410.100A. 2 - Watercourse Setbacks –
Follow watercourse setbacks guidelines for
developments granted preliminary plan or plat
approval on or after July 10, 2002. A minimum 50-
foot setback must be provided along both sides of
all other watercourses. The setback must extend to
the edge of any delineated 100-year floodplain if the
floodplain is larger than the setbacks established in
this subsection. The setback must include
immediately adjacent wetlands (i.e., fringe). The
buffer width must be extended by the width of the
wetland. Delineate all watercourse setbacks in the
preliminary plat including zones 1 and 2.
Planning The required watercourse
setbacks are shown on the
Preliminary Plat.
19 Section 38.550.070 - All perimeter street boulevard,
street trees and landscaping must be installed
within one year of final plat approval. Landscape
plans for these areas must be submitted with the
preliminary plat application. Provide provisions for
phased improvements as necessary.
Planning Understood.
Phases of the neighborhood
as shown in the Phase Plan
(Appendix A) and within the
Civil exhibits.
20 With the Preliminary Plat submittal, provide an
Affordable Housing Plan Application (AH Form)
detailing how Phase 1 will satisfy the requirements
of Section 38.380, BMC.
Planning An Affordable Housing Plan,
including the required form,
has been included as
Appendix L.
21 Pursuant to Section 38.420, parkland dedication is
required. Prepare a master park plan and density
calculation meeting the requirements of this section
with your preliminary plat submittal. Required
watercourse setbacks and stormwater facilities are
unacceptable for parkland dedication unless
approved by the review authority for incorporation
into the design of the larger park area. The master
park plan must address park frontage and linear
park requirements. At this time, the large park on
the east side will not meet park frontage
requirements unless the entire section of 11th and
Blackwood around it is constructed with the phase
that the park will be built in, which in this case, is
phase 2. A parkland tracking and accounting table
must be included on the plat. Please also identify
irrigation systems within each of these parks.
Planning The Parks Master Plan
includes details on the
proposed parkland
dedication. Please see
Appendix E for additional
information.
1 Need to have plated 10-foot public utility easements
along the streets and any alley ways where the lot
does not front a street. Will need to work with NWE
project engineer to determine best location for
NWE Public utility easements are
included on the preliminary
plat.
88
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 27 of 49
easements. Looking at the latest site plan
easements are shown along all street fronts.
Alleyway show 30-ft access utility easements.
2 With the current phasing plan potential location to
bring in gas and single phase electric could be along
the west side of Spring Ridge Drive. Applicant will
need to work with NWE project engineer to
determine the best path for bringing utilities into
the project.
NWE The applicant has been in
contact with Kory Graham of
NWE to start laying out the
power/gas lines for the
development.
3 With the potential of a mixed use project, the area
project engineer will help in getting three phase
power to the locations needing three phase service.
Currently the only available three phase power will
need to initiate off the three phase distribution
along S19th St.
NWE The applicant has been in
contact with Kory Graham of
NWE to start laying out the
power/gas lines for the
development.
4 Certain street crossings will need 12” HDPE utility
culverts across street intersections. Location for
utility culverts will be determined by the NWE
project engineer.
NWE The applicant has been in
contact with Kory Graham of
NWE to start laying out the
power/gas lines for the
development.
5 NWE will need to review landscape plan. NWE does
not allow large deep rooted trees or bushes within
the 10-foot utility easement. Any landscaping within
the utility easement will need to be approved by
NWE.
NWE This comment is noted and
will be accounted for.
6 Meter locations will need to be approved by NWE.
All meters are to be located outdoors on the corner
of the building closest to the transformer or
secondary junction can serving the property. NWE
policy is to maintain a minimum 30-inches wide by
3-foot clear zone between the front of the meter
and landscape screening and allow easy access to
the meters for operation and maintenance. This can
be determined through the design process after an
application is submitted through NWE and the area
project engineer will work through allowable shrubs
and plants for screening and to determine adequate
clearances for access to NWE meters
NWE This comment is noted and
will be accounted for.
7 The following applies to all buildings in regards to
the gas regulator. The gas regulator cannot be
placed under a window or within 3’ of the operable
portion of the window or door. It can be placed
under a window/deck on the second story, provided
the “open/operable” portion has at least 6’ of
clearance from the regulator. Ensure that there is
10’ of separation from any mechanical air intake,
including air conditioning units. The regulator will
need to be 3’ from the closest corner of any portion
of the electric meter base.
NWE This comment is noted and
will be accounted for.
89
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 28 of 49
8 Have reviewed this proposed design submittal with
NWE Project Engineer and as of this submittal and
an application for new services has not been
submitted. Recommendation is to submit an
application online, as soon as possible, to have the
NWE project engineer work with the applicant
through NWE engineering design process. Go to
www.northwesternenergy.com/construction to
apply online Montana Construction Application, and
access Montana New Service Guide to provide
information on electric and gas service
requirements
NWE The applicant has been in
contact with Kory Graham of
NWE to start laying out the
power/gas lines for the
development.
1 Section 38.220, All preliminary plat requirements, as
outlined in Article 220, shall be provided with the
preliminary plat submittal, unless otherwise
approved by the Development Review Committee
via waiver.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood
2 Section 38.240.050, Disposition of Water Rights.
Water rights, or cash-in-lieu thereof, as calculated
by the Director of Public Works, is due with the filing
of each subdivision final plat.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
3 Per Section 38.240.420, Mortgagee. If there are
liens or mortgages against the property, the
appropriate Mortgagee certificate must be
included.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
4 Section 38.400.110.B.1, Transportation Pathways.
Developers must install transportation pathways, to
provide adequate multimodal transportation
facilities within the development, as part of the
required development improvements.
Transportation pathways must be Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) accessible, and include the
following types of facilities:
a. Sidewalks (also see division 38.510 for
sidewalk standards, depending on the applicable
block frontage designation);
b. On-street bike lanes and bike routes;
c. Boulevard trails; and
d. Class I trails;
i. With the exception of trail corridors within
required watercourse setbacks, corridors for Class I
trails must be dedicated to the city. The dedicated
trail corridor must be at least 25 feet in width to
ensure adequate room for the construction,
maintenance and use of the trail. Transportation
trail corridors cannot be used to satisfy parkland
dedication requirements; and
e. Pathways that connect community or
neighborhood commercial nodes by a reasonably
direct route; or
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
90
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 29 of 49
f. Pathways that connect major residential,
employment, educational, or other service nodes by
a reasonably direct route.
5 Section 38.400.110.B.2, Recreation pathways. For
the definition of recreation pathways, please see
section 38.420.110.B. Delineate recreation and
transportation pathways in the preliminary plat
submittal.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
6 Section 38.410.060, Utility easements shall be
provided in accordance with the UDC. The required
10-foot front yard easement is required for all lots
unless written confirmation is submitted with the
preliminary plat from ALL utility companies
providing service indicating that front yard
easements are not needed.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
7 Section 38.410.080.D, Grading and Drainage.
Proposed storm water facilities must be constructed
and contained on an individual lot as a common
area(s) or parkland owned by the City and
maintained by the property owners’ association and
noted accordingly in the protective covenants.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
8 Section 38.410.080.H, Landscape Amenities.
Stormwater retention/detention facilities in
landscaped areas shall be designed as landscape
amenities. They shall be an organic feature with a
natural, curvilinear shape. The facilities shall have
75 percent of surface area covered with live
vegetation appropriate for the depth and design of
the retention/detention facility, and be lined with
native grasses, indigenous plants, wet root tolerant
plant types and groupings of boulders to create a
functional yet, natural site feature.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
9 Section 38.410.120, If mail delivery will not be to
each individual lot within the development, the
developer shall provide an off-street area for mail
delivery within the development in cooperation
with the USPS. It shall not be the responsibility of
the City to maintain or plow any mail delivery area
constructed within a City right-of-way. If cluster
boxes are use a dedicated area to pull up and access
the boxes must be provided.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
10 Section 38.550.070 requires that the perimeter
external streets of the subdivision be constructed
with a vegetative boulevard, street trees and
irrigation in the public right of way.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
11 Section 38.220.310, Property Owners’ Association.
All areas reserved for open space and other
common areas (i.e., storm water facilities) to be
owned and maintained by the property owners’
association will need to be identified on the
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
91
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 30 of 49
preliminary plat as “common open space”, not
“open space”, and so noted accordingly in the
property owners’ association documents.
12 Section 38.220.320, Covenants. Covenants,
restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the
creation of a property owners’ association shall be
submitted with the final plat application for review
and approval by the Department of Community
Development and shall contain, but not be limited
to the following items: 1) the orientation and
setbacks for corner lots, 2) all additional setbacks
required when lots are adjacent to pathway
corridors and minor arterial roads, 3) provisions for
fences, 4) provisions for snow removal,
maintenance and upkeep of all common areas,
public and private parks, trails, storm water runoff
facilities, 5) guidelines that outline architectural and
landscape requirements for each individual lot
and/or phase of the subdivision, including
placement of boulevard trees at a regular spacing
for each residential lot, 6) provisions that outline the
renewal of an annual contract with a certified
landscape nursery person for the upkeep and
maintenance of all parklands, common open space,
trails, etc., 7) landscape details for detention ponds,
outlet structures, boulevard trees, parkland,
irrigation, etc., 8) mitigation of groundwater with
established floor elevations, 9) noxious weed
control, and 10) assessment of existing and future
Special Improvement Districts.
These documents shall be submitted to the city
attorney and shall not be accepted by the City until
approved as to legal form and effect. A draft of
these documents must be submitted for review and
approval by the Community Development
Department at least 30 working days prior to
submitting a final plat application. These
documents shall be executed and submitted with
the initial final plat to be filed with the Gallatin
County Clerk and Recorder at the time of final plat
recordation.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
13 Section 38.270.030, Completion of Improvements. If
it is the developer’s intent to file the plat prior to the
completion of all required improvements, an
Improvements Agreement shall be entered into
with the City of Bozeman guaranteeing the
completion of all improvements in accordance with
the preliminary plat submittal information and
conditions of approval. If the final plat is filed prior
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
92
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 31 of 49
to the installation of all improvements, the
developer shall supply the City of Bozeman with an
acceptable method of security equal to 150 percent
of the cost of the remaining improvements.
14 Section 38.270.040, Special provisions for timing of
certain improvements. Park, pathway, boulevard,
and neighborhood center improvements must be
installed or financially guaranteed prior to final plat
approval.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
15 Section 38.220.050.A.8, requires that any noxious
weeds be identified and mapped by a person with
experience in weed management and
knowledgeable in weed identification. A noxious
weed management and revegetation plan,
approved by the County Weed Control District, shall
be submitted with the preliminary plat.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
16 Section 38.220.050.A.5, Documents and
Certificates. A draft copy of the covenants,
restrictions, and articles of incorporation for the
creation of a property owners’ association shall be
submitted with the preliminary plat application for
review and approval by the Community
Development Department and shall contain, but not
be limited to, provisions for assessment,
maintenance, repair and upkeep of private streets,
common open space areas, public parkland/open
space corridors, mail delivery areas, stormwater
facilities, public trails, sidewalks, snow removal, and
other areas common to the association pursuant to
38.220 Part 1 of the Bozeman Unified Development
Code.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
17 Section 38.220.020, The developer must provide the
community development department with a copy of
all required streambed, streambank or wetlands
permits, or written notification from the
appropriate agency that a permit is not required,
prior to the commencement of any work on the site
and/or final plat approval, whichever is sooner.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
18 Section 38.240.110, A complete preliminary plat
application shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department within one calendar year
of the date the Community Development
Department dates, signs and places pre-application
comments in the outgoing mail.
Standard Code
Provisions
Understood.
Question 2: The proposed street sections along
collector streets Blackwood Road and South 11th
show the boulevard sidewalks along the commercial
and residential lots in a location more centered in
the boulevard 6 feet off the property line, instead of
Engineering Understood.
93
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 32 of 49
the typical location 1 foot off the property line. At
this point, both the applicant and the City’s
engineering department need to discuss the
proposed future use, typical cross sections, context
of the development in relation to adjacent
properties, City utility needs (16-inch transmission
main along Blackwood and South 11th), etc. As
presented, the proposed amenity zone is located
within the City’s right-of-way. As currently
proposed, Blackwood Rd is a primary conduit for
future pedestrian and multi-modal movement
through and within Blackwood Groves, additional
details for regarding the proposed facilities need be
provided in order for engineering to provide a final
answer. The applicant must coordinate with Taylor
Lonsdale (City of Bozeman transportation engineer)
prior to preliminary plat submittal.
1 Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC) 38.230.100.A.12:
Please provide a detailed phasing plan accompanied
with exhibits that show how the development
intends to build out. In addition, the phasing plan
should clearly show sanitary sewer, water, storm,
street, buildings, trails, and other critical
infrastructure that is needed to support the specific
phases of the development.
Engineering -
General
A detailed phasing plan is
included in Appendix A and
in the Phasing Exhibit
provided in the civil
plans/exhibits. Phasing
boundaries are also provided
on the preliminary plat.
2 Design Standards and Specifications Policy (DSSP):
The applicant provided a general overview of the
water and sanitary sewer layout, however, given the
scale and size of the overall development the
applicant needs to provide a detailed utility plan
showing how future services will be provided to
each lot.
a. This utility plan should include water, sewer,
stormwater, gas, electrical, fiber, and other relevant
utilities that will service the development. The
water a sewer department has initial concerns over
the tight spacing on the smaller lots located on the
Alley’s. The applicant is advised to meet with John
Alston (City Water and Sewer Department) to
discuss future service requirements).
Engineering -
General
All utilities are shown on the
Utility Exhibit provided in the
civil plans/exhibits. Utilities
are also include on the
preliminary plat. Private
utility will be placed within
the private utility easements
in standard locations across
the subdivision. The
applicant has visited with
John Alston to discuss future
service requirements – many
utility extensions will be
reviewed under future site
plan applications.
1 BMC 38.410.060: A ten foot minimum front set back
easement using the City’s standard language must
be provided along dedicated streets for the
extension of dry utilities. The application is unclear
if the utility easement has been included along all
street frontages
Engineering -
Legal
The 10’ utility easements are
displayed on the preliminary
plat, the City standard
language is included in the
Certificate of Dedication
language on page 6 of 6 of
the preliminary plat.
2 BMC 38.410.060: The proposed ten foot pedestrian
easements shown on the plat are presented as
“approximate locations”. The applicant must
Engineering -
Legal
The 10’ pedestrian access
easements are shown on the
preliminary plat. The
locations of these easement
94
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 33 of 49
determine the final locations of the easements with
the preliminary plat.
may adjust slightly with
future site plan reviews and
will be finalized with the final
plat of the applicable phase.
3 BMC 38.410.060.C.1: The existing 16-inch water
main extending down south 11th Ave and
Blackwood Road must reside within a minimum 30-
ft water main easement. The applicant is advised
that at no point may the water main be less than 9
feet from the edge of the easement. The water
mains must be a minimum of (2) two feet from the
edge of the concrete gutters at all locations.
Engineering -
Legal
A median was added to
Blackwood Road to move the
existing 16-inch water main
into the pavement along
Blackwood. The applicant
requests that the minor
interferences along 11th be
allowed as realigning the
water main here may
introduce more issues than it
resolves. Deep rooted trees
will not be planted within the
boulevard where the water
main runs through.
4 BMC 38.410.080.E: A pubic drainage easement(s)
must be provided for the stormwater facilitates
supporting drainage from public roadways. The
property owner(s) are responsible for the
maintenance of these facilities. The application is
unclear on how the development intends to handle
stormwater.
Engineering -
Legal
All stormwater facilities are
located in Open Space
parcels with drainage and
maintenance easements as
shown on the preliminary
plat.
1 DSSP Section XVIII Submittal Requirements
a. For Street Lighting submittals, provide
luminaire cut sheets showing compliance with Table
B. New Construction Lighting Design Guidance and
Section XIII. Streetlight Luminaires.
b. For Pedestrian Lighting submittals, provide
a Photometric Plan for new installations showing
compliance with Table C. Pedestrian Lighting
Guidance. Also provide luminaire cut sheets
showing compliance with Section XIV. Pedestrian
Luminaires.
c. Provide lighting calculations showing
roadway luminance (comply with Table B),
intersection illuminance (comply with Table A),
sidewalk illuminance (Section XII
– D), and light trespass (Section XII – D).
d. The applicant is advised a Roadway
Luminaire Submittal Form (contained within the
DSSP) will be required with infrastructure review.
Engineering -
Lighting
The preliminary overall
lighting plan for public
streets is included in
Appendix P. City Lighting
standards will be achieved.
Detailed calculations will be
provided during civil
infrastructure review.
2 BMC 38.400.070: Subdivision lighting special
improvement lighting district (SILD) information
shall be submitted to the City and the district
formed after preliminary plat approval in hard copy
and digital form. Any final plat application will not
be deemed complete until the resolution to create
the SILD has been approved by the City Commission.
Engineering -
Lighting
A SILD will be created prior to
final plat approval for any
phase.
95
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 34 of 49
The initial adoption of the special improvement
lighting district shall include the entire area of the
preliminary plat. The approval to create or annex to
an existing SILD shall be granted prior to final plat
for a subdivision or Occupancy if a final plat is not
required.
1 BMC 38.210.060.A.12: A traffic impact study (TIS)
will be required for the proposed development
which will need to discuss how much daily traffic will
be generated on existing local and neighborhood
streets, roads, and alleys when the subdivision is
fully developed.
Engineering -
TIS
The traffic impact study is
included in Appendix U.
2 The associated trip distribution within the TIS needs
to be expanded given the scale of the development,
which should include critical intersections in order
for the City to accurately assess the capacity of the
system. The applicant must coordinate with Taylor
Lonsdale (City of Bozeman transportation engineer).
Engineering -
TIS
Please refer to the TIS in
Appendix U. The applicant
has coordinated with Taylor
Lonsdale on these items.
3 Multimodal transportation, such as bike lanes and
pedestrian facilities must be addressed within the
TIS. The TIS should include detail on multimodal
transportation to address circulation within the
proposed development as well as impacts/needed
improvements to the City’s surrounding non-
motorized transportation network. The applicant
must coordinate with Taylor Lonsdale (City of
Bozeman transportation engineer).
Engineering -
TIS
Please refer to the TIS in
Appendix U, the proposed
street sections in Appendix
N, and the Parks Master Plan
in Appendix E for information
on multimodal
transportation provided
within this development. The
applicant has coordinated
with Taylor Lonsdale on
these items.
1 BMC 38.400.010: All streets must comply with the
adopted growth policy and/or transportation plan.
The arrangement, type, extent, width, grade and
location of all streets must be considered in their
relation to existing and planned streets, to
topographical conditions, to public convenience and
safety, and to the proposed uses of the land to be
served by such streets. The design standards
contained in these regulations apply to all
construction, reconstruction and paving of streets.
Review authority for exceptions or modifications to
this section is specified in division 38.200.010. a.
As presented in the phasing plan, Street B
must connect to South 19th with the first phase
(Phase 1) of the development. Without this
segment, all traffic from Phase 1 is forced onto
South 11th Ave. The applicant’s traffic impact study
will need to evaluate the Street B/19th connection.
Furthermore, a left turn lane may be needed into
the subject property from South 19th street.
b. As presented in the phasing plan, the Phase
5 portion of Blackwood Road and South 11th must
Engineering -
Transportation
All streets comply with the
adopted growth policy and
transportation plan. Please
refer to the proposed street
sections in Appendix N and
the phasing plan in Appendix
A. The applicant does not
propose to connect Street B
to 19th Ave. as part of Phase
1 as the multiple connections
provided to South 15th,
Spring Ridge Drive, 11th Ave.
(collector), and to South 3rd
Ave. (collector) provide
ample capacity for the Phase
1 generated traffic. The
development will connect to
19th as part of Phase 2. This is
addressed in the TIS
(Appendix U). The applicant
concurs with comment 2.b
and Blackwood and 11th are
96
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 35 of 49
be completed with Phase 3 of the development. In
summary, Blackwood Road would need to connect
between South 11th Street and South 19th Ave.
c. The applicant needs to consider how the
phasing impacts the future widening of South 19th
adjacent to each phase. For example, the applicant
may want to widen South 19th from Blackwood
south end of Phase 4 with the Phase 3 intersection
improvements, etc. Otherwise, the subsequent
phases would need to complete the upgrade in
short succession for such a small stretch. The extent
and timing of these improvements must be clearly
identified in the phasing plan.
now proposed to connect in
Phase 3 of the development.
The phasing plan currently
shows 19th being widened in
two phases (Phases 2 and 4).
2 BMC 38.400.010: South 11th and Blackwood Road
must be constructed to a collector standard
according to the City’s Transportation Master Plan
(TMP). The extent and timing of these
improvements must be clearly identified in the
phasing plan.
a. Blackwood Road will serve as a bicycle
connection to and from Sacajawea Middle School.
Accommodation of through bicyclists needs to be
incorporated into street cross section and overall
plan.
Engineering -
Transportation
South 11th and Blackwood
will be constructed to
collector standards. Please
refer to the street sections
provided in Appendix N.
3 BMC 38.400.010: South 19th Avenue must be
upgraded to a principal arterial standard along the
western edge of the property according to the City’s
Transportation Master Plan (TMP). Timing of this
improvement must be clearly identified with the
phasing plan.
Engineering -
Transportation
South 19th will be upgraded
to a principal arterial, please
refer to the phasing plan in
Appendix A.
4 BMC 38.400.110. and 38.410.120: A trail network
must be constructed through the property as
defined in the City Parks, Recreation, Open Space,
and Trails (PROST) Plan and TMP. The design of all
trails identified in the TMP must be included on the
infrastructure plan submittal for the corresponding
phase. In addition, the applicant is encouraged to
coordinate with the Bozeman public transit service
(Streamline) to incorporate service into the
development.
Engineering -
Transportation
The proposed trail network
satisfies the requirements of
the City PROST Plan – please
see the Parks Master Plan in
Appendix E. The applicant
will continue to coordinate
with Streamline on a
potential service to the
development.
5 The typical sections shown for South 11th Ave and
Blackwood Road need additional detail , which
includes the following:
a. South 11th Avenue and Blackwood Road
should be designed with separated bike/pedestrian
facilities. For South 11th Ave, this matches the
typical section to the north and is in line with a
general trend away from on street bike lanes for
higher volume streets. Likewise, with Blackwood
Road providing direct access to Sacajawea Middle
Engineering -
Transportation
Please refer to the street
sections provided in
Appendix N and the TIS in
Appendix U for all details on
the proposed street sections.
97
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 36 of 49
School, separated facilities provide a greater level of
comfort for a wider range of users.
b. Blackwood Road will likely require a two-
way left turn lane or center median to
accommodate the addition of left turn lanes. This
issue must be addressed as part of the traffic impact
study requirements.
c. The desire for on street parking on South
11th Ave and Blackwood Road warrants further
discussion with the engineering department. The
applicant must coordinate with Taylor Lonsdale.
d. Typical sections and their tie to context is
appreciated. However, further details are needed to
provide substantive comment. The applicant is
encourage to work with Taylor Lonsdale on the
typical street sections.
6 BMC 38.330.020: Angled parking will be permitted
for the development, however, the following
requirements must be satisfied.
a. The proposed streets will still remain a
public street. A note must be added to the plat
under the Conditions of Approval that states the
POA must maintain the back-in angled parking
spaces which includes snow removal, pavement
maintenance, and all of the maintenance functions
of the back-in angled parking spaces.
b. The applicant must file a maintenance
agreement with the County Clerk and Recorder in
addition to the plat note identifying the
maintenance requirements and responsibilities of
the back-in angled parking spaces.
c. The street design must include a concrete
delineator between the asphalt in the drive lanes
and the parking spaces. The parking delineator can
be valley gutter, a concrete apron, or something
similar deemed acceptable by the City’s engineering
department.
d. The radii on the transitions to the angled
parking spaces need to be 25’ minimum to allow the
plows to navigate the street edges. Also, vertical
delineators need to be posted on the edges.
e. The applicant’s snow storage plan must
identify areas in the subdivision where the snow will
be hauled and there must be sufficient volume in
the snow storage areas for the volume that would
have otherwise been stored in the boulevards.
Engineering -
Transportation
The proposed angled parking
streets will remain public
streets. Please see note #5
on page 6 of 6 of the
Preliminary Plat. The
applicant will file a
maintenance agreement
with the County Clerk and
Recorder identifying the
maintenance requirements
and responsibilities – this
agreement will be filed at
final plat for the applicable
phases. A concrete
delineator will be included
between the travel lanes and
the angled parking spaces –
please see the street sections
in Appendix N. The radii of
the transitions will
accommodate snow plows
and vertical delineators will
be provided – this
information will be included
in the infrastructure plans for
the applicable phases.
Additional landscaped
medians have been added to
the angled parking street
sections for snow storage.
Snow can also be hauled to
the stormwater pond in the
northwest corner of the
Subdivision.
98
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 37 of 49
7 Cambridge Drive and the roundabout at Cambridge
ant 11th –
a. Cambridge Drive should have 10 foot
shared use path on both sides. The south side
should connect to the path at Sacajawea Middle
School and the north side should connect with the
Gallagator Trail System.
b. The crossings at the roundabout should all
be for a 10 foot shared use path
c. Smooth/rounded corner transitions should
be included at pathway crossing locations.
Engineering -
Transportation
Cambridge includes 10-ft
sidewalks surrounding the
roundabout continuing east
to the Gallagator trail
connection and to the
Sacajawea Middle School
sidewalk.
8 A roundabout at South 11th Ave and Blackwood
Road should be evaluated. This has been the typical
channelization method utilized on South 11th.
Engineering -
Transportation
A standard intersection is
proposed at South 11th and
Blackwood to enhance the
pedestrian experience at the
Town Center and the
Gallagtor trail connection.
Please refer to the TIS in
Appendix U.
9 The proposed mid-block crossing located on South
11th Ave (between Street B and Cambridge Drive)
should be a 10 foot wide path crossing.
a. The trail corridor located west of the mid-
block crossing located off-of Alley 2 should
accommodate a 10 foot wide path. The easement
will need to be a 30 foot public access easement.
Engineering -
Transportation
A 10-ft wide path crossing is
included at this mid-block
crossing.
10 South 11th Ave should have 10 foot shared use path
on both sides of the street. This is a continuation of
the existing street section to the north.
Engineering -
Transportation
The applicant has
coordinated this with Taylor
Lonsdale. A 10-ft sidewalk is
provided along the east side
of 11th (along the Park) but a
shared-use trail along the
west side of 11th is not
appropriate due to the
storefront block frontage of
the Town Center.
11 The trail corridor running E-W through Blocks 17 and
18 will need to have a 30 foot wide public access
easement and accommodate a 10 foot path.
Engineering -
Transportation
A 10-ft pedestrian easement
is included for Blocks 17 and
18 as this is the community
commercial Town Center.
Setbacks required from a 10-
ft easement will create a 30-
ft corridor for pedestrians.
Plans for the Town Center will
incorporate this important
pedestrian connection and
will be reviewed under a
future site plan application.
99
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 38 of 49
12 The applicant is advised that access for Street B at
South 19th Avenue will be subject to intersection
spacing requirements and will be reviewed by MDT
with respect to potential access control and spacing
with other intersections along S outh 19th Ave
which is an Urban Route on MDT’s system. The
applicant will need to provide the City and MDT with
access approvals for any street connecting to South
19 th.
Engineering -
Transportation
The applicant is coordinating
with Montana Department of
Transportation (MDT) on
these connections to South
19th.
1 DSSP Section (V) (A) Main Size: The applicant is
advised that the subject property is
located at the southern end of the City’s main
pressure zone (Sourdough Zone). Water pressures
around the subject property vary from 35 to 50 psi.
The water distribution system must be designed to
meet the maximum day demand plus fire flow and
the peak hour demand requirements upon future
development. All additions to the water system will
be designed and installed in accordance with the
Montana Department of Environmental Quality
Circular 1; Montana Public Works Standards and
Specifications (MPWSS); City of Bozeman
Modifications to MPWSS; and the City’s most recent
Water Facility Plan;.
a. The applicant did not provide adequate
information to determine if the entire site can be
serviced within the existing Sourdough pressure
zone. The water facility plan identified the need for
a new pressure zone (Water Treatment Plan Zone)
in ordered to service the southern end of the
proposed development.
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
Please see the Water Design
Report in Appendix W.
2 BMC 38.410.070. and 38.230.100.A.12: Each phase
of development must connect to the water
distribution system at a minimum of two points to
allow a redundant feed (per City of Bozeman
Engineering DSSP Section V.A. 5).
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
Each phase of development
provides connections to the
water distribution system at a
minimum of two points.
3 Bozeman Design Standards and Specifications Policy
(DSSP) V.D.1: The alignment of all water, sanitary
sewer, and storm sewer mains and services shall be
arranged so that there is a minimum of ten (10) feet
of horizontal separation between these lines and
with any gas lines, power lines, communication
lines, utility poles or other above-grade utility
structures, and street lights.
a. The applicant must provide adequate
separation from the edge of streets, etc. In general,
private utilities should be removed from public
utility easements or have adequate separation. The
applicant is advised to work with the water and
sewer department to determine what is acceptable
for future maintenance. As presented, the applicant
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
The alignment of all water,
sanitary sewer, and storm
sewer mains satisfy City
Standard requirements.
100
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 39 of 49
must revise the proposed utility plans to satisfy
DSSP conditions prior to master site plan approval.
4 DSSP. V.D.2.c: When water mains cross sanitary or
storm sewer mains, the water line must have an
eighteen (18) inch minimum vertical separation,
with all water pipe joints no closer than ten (10) feet
horizontal from the sewer pipe centerline, and the
crossing will be perpendicular to the sewer line. A
minimum of (10) feet horizontal separation shall be
maintained between any water main and any
sanitary or storm sewer main.
a. As presented, the applicant must revise the
proposed utility plans to satisfy DSSP conditions
prior to master site plan approval.
b. The applicant is advised to minimize utility
crossings, cross perpendicular, and keep private
utilities, including storm drainage out of public
easements, whenever possible.
c. The applicant is advised that the City must
have the ability to access buried utilities for
maintenance activities.
d. Horizontal alignment between manholes
shall be straight, if applicable.
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
The alignment and depth of
all water, sanitary sewer, and
storm sewer mains will satisfy
City Standard requirements.
5 BMC 38.410.070 (A) (1) Municipal water, sanitary
sewer and storm sewer systems: The subject
property is located within the Cattail Creek Sanitary
Sewer Drainage Basin. The wastewater facility plan
identified the need for a future sanitary sewer
extension through the subject property (CIP
Reference: 12-inch South 3rd Ave – Goldenstein Ln
to S 19th & 18-inch S 19th Ave – South 3rd
intersection to Graf) that must be constructed upon
future development to serve the proposed area. All
sanitary sewer flows must be routed to the drainage
basin that serves the area as identified in the City of
Bozeman Wastewater Collection Facilities Plan.
The applicant is advised that the development must
complete and install the sanitary sewer extension
from the developments southern property
boundary to the intersection of Graf & South 19th
as defined in the City wastewater facility plan.
a. The applicant is advised that all
wastewater flow generated from the proposed
development must remain in the Cattail Creek
sanitary sewer drainage basin and that Alternative 1
within the Master Site Plan submittal would not be
allowed. Alternative 1 allocates a certain portion of
the development into the Spring Creek Drainage
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
All sanitary sewer generated
within Blackwood Groves will
be routed to the Cattail Creek
Drainage Basin.
101
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 40 of 49
basin, which did not account for flow from the
proposed development in the City’s wastewater
facility plan.
6 DSSP Section (V) (B) Sanitary Sewer System Design
Criteria: The applicant must provide an estimate of
the peak-hour sanitary sewer demand for the
different phases certified by a professional engineer
for the proposed project prior to master site plan
approval. Given the size of the proposed
development additional information is needed to
verify downstream sewer capacity as well as keep
the City’s wastewater model updated.
a. The report must show that the provided
design estimates are in accordance with City of
Bozeman design standards, and are sized to
accurately accommodate the full build out of the
Blackwood Groves Development.
b. Localized Infiltration & Inflow must be
included in sewer main sizing. Per the DSSP, an
infiltration rate of 150 gallons/acre/day shall be
added to all flow calculations when designing new
sewers.
c. Provide a summary of allocated sewer
flows for each future lot that may be referenced for
individual site plan design review.
d. The applicant is advised that downstream
sewer capacity has not be analyzed because
inadequate sewer flow information has been
provided.
Engineering –
Water &
Wastewater
Please refer to the Sanitary
Sewer Design Report in
Appendix W.
1 1. BMC 40.04.700: A comprehensive drainage
plan is required for all development larger than five
acres. "Comprehensive drainage plan" means a
stormwater management plan that covers all
current and anticipated development on a site
greater than five acres and sites planned for phased
development, including the impact on existing off-
site infrastructure.
a. The applicant is advised that if the drainage
design utilizes infiltration, the applicant must
demonstrate that the infiltration rate can be
maintained for the lifespan of the facility. To
maintain infiltration, the design must include
pretreatment, which removes silts and sediment
from entering the infiltration area.
b. The stormwater report for the master site
plan should include calculations demonstrating that
adequate space has been dedicated to meet the City
storage requirement during seasonal high
groundwater. Detailed calculations for these
facilities are not required with the master site plan.
Engineering -
Stormwater
Please refer to the
Stormwater Management
Design Report in Appendix X.
102
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 41 of 49
Geotechnical reports and seasonal high
groundwater levels need to be provided to verify
that future designs will function. The applicant is
advised to verify local groundwater elevations and
incorporate these levels into the drainage design
report.
c. The applicant is advised that the
engineering department will allow boulevard strips
and medians that incorporate natural drainage
technologies. The applicant is encourage to utilize
the Montana Post-Construction Stormwater BMP
Design Guidance Manual. Lastly, the applicant
needs to provide enough information that both
engineering and the streets department can
evaluate the proposed design to ensure that it can
be maintained.
d. The drainage report must include an
exhibit that defines the overall drainage area,
respective subwatersheds, and required storage
volumes. The overall stormwater design must
consider the proposed phasing of the development
and ensure that both water quality and quantity
standards are satisfied.
e. In the event that the applicant wishes to
dedicate the proposed street and utility easements
as public ROW, public drainage easements must be
provided for all storm conveyance facilities located
outside of the easements. All stormwater basins
must be located in common open space lots,
overlaid with a pubic drainage easement. The
property owner(s) will remain responsible for the
maintenance of the facilities.
f. The applicant did not provide any
information on how the site will manage drainage.
Therefore, engineer cannot provide any substantive
comment.
1 BMC 38.600: The Master Site Plan must depict the
delineated floodplain where the BFE from the new
FEMA flood study intersects natural ground. The
location of the floodway shall be shown using
georeferenced digital shapefiles provided by the
floodplain administrator.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
The floodplain is delineated
on the preliminary plat.
2 BMC 38.600: The applicant must provide a floodway
encroachment analysis and “no- rise” certification
for the Blackwood Road and Cambridge Drive
crossings of Figgins Creek. If “no-rise” cannot be
achieved, then a conditional letter of map revision
(CLOMR) shall be approved by FEMA prior to Master
Site Plan approval.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
The no-rise certification and
floodway encroachment
analysis are included in
Appendix Y.
103
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 42 of 49
3 BMC 38.600: The applicant is advised that a
floodplain permit must be obtained for any work
proposed in the FEMA floodplain. The floodplain
administrator must issue an approved floodplain
permit prior to Master Site Plan approval. The
applicant is advised that the floodplain permit
cannot be issued until all other required stream
permits have been obtained, and if applicable, a
CLOMR is approved by FEMA.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
The applicant will secure all
necessary floodplain permits
prior to construction.
4 BMC 38.600: The Master Site Plan shows a
waterway that appears to meet the definition of a
watercourse as it appears a portion of its flow is
contributed by a spring on the adjoining property to
the south. The watercourse setback must be
provided along this waterway unless it can be shown
that all water within this waterway is not naturally
occurring, which in that case a minimum 20’ wide
ditch easement shall be provided and remain free of
building encroachments. Regardless of its
classification as a ditch or a watercourse, this
waterway must be contained within a pipe where it
encroaches upon street right of way.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
This watercourse is sourced
from a man-made draintile on
the property to the south.
The farmers on the property
to the south installed a
draintile system on the
property several years ago.
The applicant is coordinating
with the Middle Creek Ditch
Company on all applicable
ditch easements. These
easements are shown on the
preliminary plat.
5 BMC 38.600: The irrigation ditch along the west
property boundary must be provided with a
minimum 20’ wide access and maintenance
easement. It is unclear if the ditch is contain within
the 19th Ave ROW.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
The ditch easement is shown
on the Preliminary Plat.
6 BMC 38.600: There are a number of proposed
culverts located throughout the property that are
intended to convey water via the ditch systems and
potentially stormwater. The
applicant must provide hydraulic calculations
showing that the culverts throughout the
development have been adequately sized.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
The no-rise certification and
floodway encroachment
analysis includes the
hydraulic calculations to
prove adequate sizing for
these culverts. Any
additional sizing calculations
will be provided during
infrastructure plan review.
7 BMC 38.220.020 & 38.610.050. Prior to final plat,
the applicant must provide the Community
Development Department with a written statement
of a wetland boundary determination from the U.S.
Army Corps of the wetland status. If the wetlands
are determined to be jurisdictional, a 404 permit
must be submitted to the Community Development
office prior to final plat approval.
Engineering –
Natural
Resources
This item is noted. The
wetland delineation
summary and supporting
documents are included in
Appendix O.
1 BMC 38.410.130: Water rights and/or payment of
cash-in-lieu of water right is required prior to
development for the demand on the City’s potable
water system. The applicant must contact Brian
Heaston with the City Engineering Department to
obtain a determination of cash-in-lieu of water
rights (CILWR).
Engineering –
Water Rights
Water rights and/or payment
of cash-in-lieu of water rights
will be provided prior to final
plat of all applicable phases.
104
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 43 of 49
1 38.420.030.A Cash-in-lieu The review authority
may determine whether the park dedication must
be a land dedication, cash donation in-lieu of land
dedication or a combination of both. For the
purposes of this section construction of park
improvements above the minimum improvements
required by ordinance may be allowed as a method
of cash donation. When making this determination,
the review authority must consider the factors
established by resolution of the city commission.
The preliminary CILP proposal, meeting the
requirements of 38.420.030 and Resolution 4784,
must be approved with the Park Master Plan. All
subsequent preliminary plat phases must show
compliance with the Park Master Plan CILP
proposal, be updated to reflect the CILP appraisal
value at the time of review, and provide the value of
specific improvements to be installed at that time.
See condition of approval.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
For RPAB’s review of the
parkland dedication, please
share the following
documents with the Advisory
Board to allow for their
review (RPAB members are
also encouraged to review
additional Preliminary Plat
files as needed).
• Parks Master Plan
and Parks Master
Plan Appendices
(Appendix E)
• Wetland Delineation
Report and
Supporting
Documents
(Appendix O)
• Preliminary Plat and
Associated Civil
Sheets
2 38.420.030.C Cash donation in-lieu of land
dedication must be equal to the fair market value of
the amount of land that would have been dedicated.
The valuation used for calculating the amount due
will be the valuation in effect at the time an
application for final plat or final plan approval is
complete.
Once CILP is provided, the requirement has been
met and no new adjustments are required upon
future phase completion. Current appraisal value is
$1.72 psf.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood. All documents
have been updated to reflect
this current appraisal value.
3 38.420.030.D CILP Amount must be stated on
the Final Plat or Plan.
Amounts are estimates until application
completeness is determined.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
4 38.420.020.D To ensure coordination when
parks are being created by a multiphase
development, the entire parkland dedication must
be accomplished at the time of the initial phase of
the development. If necessary, this may be
accomplished through the grant of public access
easements during later phases.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
105
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 44 of 49
Land for future phases is not transferred to the City
for maintenance responsibilities until the park is
improved and accepted by the Parks Division. See
condition of approval
5 38.420.080.B - Boundaries. The park boundary
bordering all private lots must be delineated at the
common private/public corner pins, with flat,
flexible fiberglass posts, a minimum of six feet in
length with no less than two feet driven into the
ground. Each post must be labeled with a
permanent glued on sign stating "Park Boundary" or
"Property Boundary." Other forms of boundary
marking may be approved by the planning or other
appropriate department.
Individual park construction/site plans must include
designs for these signs that complement the
standard park sign or any adopted wayfinding
signage.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
6 All individual park construction/site plans submitted
with preliminary plat applications must provide a
park sign and naming plan meeting the
requirements of Appendix G of the PROST and
Resolution 5092 Park Naming Policy.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
7 All individual park construction/site plans must
meet the requirements of Appendix C of the PROST.
Irrigation system requirements have been
updated/should be coordinated with Parks Division
staff. Alternative fencing solutions may be accepted
depending on their use.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
8 Parks staff requests a discussion with landscape
architects and Engineering Division/Brian Heaston
regarding well placement, easements, etc.
Additional Conditions of Approval may be
recommended.
Parks – Code
Corrections
Understood.
1 To be included within a park, stormwater facilities
within parks must be designed, constructed and/or
added to so as to be conducive to the normal use
and maintenance of the park. Stormwater facilities
must be designed to be minimally intrusive (i.e.
designed underground or fenced off), must be
signed as a stormwater facility, and the Plat
conditions of approval sheet must indicate that all
maintenance is responsibility of POA.
Parks –
Conditions of
Approval
Understood. Landscape plans
for all stormwater facilities
are included within the
Boulevard and Open Space
Landscape Plans submitted
with Preliminary Plat.
Maintenance of these areas
are described within the
Appendix E: Parks Master
Plan - Section 1.
2 Stormwater Memorandum of Understanding to
supplement maintenance plan may be required; to
be coordinated with Engineering and Parks.
Parks –
Conditions of
Approval
Understood.
106
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 45 of 49
3 Regarding inclusion of wetland and watercourse
setback areas within parkland boundaries:
a. PROST 8.1.2.4 With the preliminary plat
or plan, the developer must provide an evaluation
of the future maintenance requirements for the
wetland(s) and a preliminary maintenance plan,
both prepared by a qualified person or agency.
b. PROST 8.1.2.5 The proposal must be
reviewed by, and receive a favorable
recommendation from, the RPAB.
c. PROST 8.1.2.6 If City Commission
agrees to grant the waiver or accept the land
dedication, the Commission may request that
amenities such as benches, trails and interpretive
signage be installed. If these sorts of amenities will
be installed, public access must be provided.
Parks –
Conditions of
Approval
The applicant is no longer
requesting a waiver for the
inclusion of watercourse
setbacks or stormwater
facilities as dedicated
parkland.
4 A note stating the following shall be placed on the
Final Plat Conditions of Approval Sheet: The City is
not responsible for maintenance of parkland
dedicated for future phases, in accordance with
BMC 38.420.020.D., until parkland improvements
are complete and fully accepted by the City.
Parks –
Conditions of
Approval
Understood.
5 All subsequent preliminary plat phases
incorporating CILP must show compliance with the
Park Master Plan CILP proposal, be updated to
reflect any changes to CILP appraisal value, and
must provide an itemized table with the value of
specific improvements to be installed with the
phase.
Parks –
Conditions of
Approval
Understood.
107
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 46 of 49
V. Response to Applicable Subdivision Review Criteria (BMC Sec. 38.240.130)
1) Compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the Montana Subdivision and
Platting Act.
The Preliminary Plat demonstrates compliance with the survey requirements of Part 4 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act and has been prepared by a Professional Engineer
registered in the State of Montana. The subsequent Final Plat will 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.
This application is in compliance with the local subdivision regulations provided for in Part 5
of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act. The final plat shall comply with the standards
identified and referenced in the Bozeman Municipal Code (BMC).
3) Compliance with the local subdivision review procedures provided for in Part 6 of the
Montana Subdivision and Platting Act.
This Preliminary Plat is undergoing review according to the procedures provided for in UDC
Section 38.240.130 and Part 6 of the Montana Subdivision and Platting Act.
4) Compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and other relevant regulations.
The application is in compliance with Chapter 38, BMC and all other relevant regulations, or,
as stipulated in any unmet code provisions, will be in substantial compliance prior to
Preliminary Plat approval.
5) The provision of easements to and within the subdivision for the location and installation
of any necessary utilities.
All necessary utility easements have been provided for, both to and within the subdivision, as
shown on the Preliminary Plat.
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 subdivision parcels have been provided with legal and physical, as shown on the
Preliminary Plat, which includes the relevant instrument numbers as required.
108
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 47 of 49
Primary Subdivision Review Criteria, Section 76-3-608
1) The effect on agriculture.
The subject property is designated as Residential Mixed according to the City of Bozeman
Community Plan. The area is zoned Residential-Emphasis Mixed Use and has been annexed
but is vacant. The buildable portion of the proposed subdivision is primarily residential with
some community commercial uses. The property has been producing alfalfa and will continue
to farm alfalfa as Blackwood Groves is developed in phases. The subdivision will not have
adverse effects on surrounding agricultural operations.
2) The effect on Agricultural water user facilities.
All agricultural water uses facilities on and adjacent to this project will be protected. The
applicant has worked with the Middle Creek Ditch Company to ensure that all agricultural
water uses facilities will be protected and that access for maintenance is adequately
provided.
3) The effect on Local services.
Water/Sewer – Municipal water and sewer mains exist within the development and in the
adjacent street rights of way of to serve the development. The subdivider proposes to extend
water and sewer mains throughout the development and to the individual lots within the
subdivision. These internal water and sewer mains will be installed or guaranteed prior to
final plat approval.
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 utilizes South 19th Avenue (arterial), Blackwood Road
(future collector), and South 11th Avenue (collector) to provide primary site connectivity.
Other internal local streets provide access to all lots. The project is well connected and meets
block length requirements with the proposed streets and pedestrian midblock crossings.
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 to individual homes prior to recording of the final plat.
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. This responsibility is addressed on the plat proposed with the
subdivision.
109
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 48 of 49
Parklands - The proposal meets the required park dedication and improvement standards as
described in Appendix E.
4) The effect on the Natural environment.
The subdivision will not have a significant effect on the Natural environment. Blackwood
Groves was designed with a focus on preserving the natural elements that exist within the
property. Natural watercourse corridors are being maintained with 50-ft wetland setbacks
provided on both sides to create a minimum 100-ft corridor along the site’s natural
watercourses. The existing tree grove is being preserved and incorporated into Park 3.
Importantly, there is an existing wetland that runs near the eastern border of the site. While
11th Avenue was originally designed to cut through the widest area of the wetland (per the
City’s long range Transportation Plan), we worked closely with City staff to shift 11th
westward to limit any impacts on this important natural element. Wetlands and watercourses
run throughout the eastern portion of the property as shown in the wetlands report
(Appendix O). All required wetland permits will be secured prior to any disturbance of
wetlands on site.
The watercourse setback for the watercourse is located within the proposed parks corridor,
and this area is to be protected as part of the overall development of the parks. The project
proposes to use native and drought-tolerant plants where practical (and allowed under City
standards). Watercourse plantings along the site’s natural watercourses will also be provided.
Parks and open spaces will be irrigated with exempt irrigation wells using efficient watering
techniques and technologies to promote water conservation. See Appendix E – Parks Master
Plan for additional information on the proposed plantings and irrigation plan.
5) The effect on wildlife and wildlife habitat
The subdivision will not significantly impact wildlife and wildlife habitat at this property. The
Parks Master Plan (Appendix E) has demonstrated a dedication to preservation and
enhancement of Blackwood Groves’ riparian corridors. There are no known endangered or
threatened species on the property.
6) The effect on Public Health and Safety
The proposed subdivision will not have a negative effect on public health and safety. All
infrastructure will meet or exceed City standards and will protect public health and safety.
The improvements to watercourses will not impact the current floodplains on the project site
nor will they increase flood risk on the property or surrounding properties. The No-Rise
analysis and floodway encroachment analysis will be provided for the Blackwood Road and
110
BLACKWOOD GROVES
Subdivision Preliminary Plat Narrative
January 2021
Page 49 of 49
Cambridge Drive to ensure protection of life and property from flood impacts.
The project will be further reviewed through future Final Plats and Site Plans to ensure the
intent of the regulations in Chapter 38 of the Bozeman Municipal Code is met. Chapter 38
includes the protection of public health, safety, and general welfare as a foundational tenet;
therefore, the subdivision continues to be reviewed with this expectation in mind. DRC review
has shown that this submittal is in general compliance with the Chapter 38, and conditions of
approval are expected in response to this submittal where additional information is required
to ensure approval. All subdivisions must be reviewed against the criteria listed in 76-3-
608.3.b-d, Mont Code Annotated, and this narrative demonstrates compliance with the
requirements as shown herein.
111
Δ
Δ BLOCKOPEN SPACE (SF)LOTS (SF)TOTAL (SF)112
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.
MEETING DATE:May 3, 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:Discussion Outline
1. Description of Current Process for Review of Development Applications
(Special Presentation) - Rogers/Saunders
a. Introduction to subdivision review process in the City of
Bozeman. See previous Special Presentation
b. Brochure "Subdivision & Subdivision Exemptions"
2. Consideration of early stage input from the Planning Board to
developers and from developers to the Planning Board
a. Hap memo to Planning Board of April 12, pointing to numbered
paragraphs 1. and 2. on page 3.
3. Identification of significant provisions of the UDC that are inconsistent
with the new growth policy
a. Hap Memo to the Planning Board of April 12, pointing to numbered
paragraph 3 on page 3.
b. March 25 Memo from Richard Rudnicki and Jennifer Madgic, pointing
to the section entitled “Key Ordinance Amendments”
c. Mark Egge Code Changes to Support the Development of Missing
Middle & Affordable Housing
113
4. Better Community Outreach
a. April 7 memo from Cathy Costakis and Jerry Pape .
Discussion
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.
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
114
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
Staff Memo.pdf
Memo_to_PB-210412.pdf
Rudnicki Memo.pdf
UDC Code Edits for Affordability.docx - Google Docs.pdf
CostakisPape Memo-community_outreach.pdf
Report compiled on: April 14, 2021
115
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.
116
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.
117
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.
118
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.
119
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.
120
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.
121
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,
122
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
123
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
124
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.
125
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.
126
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.
127
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.
128
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.
129
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.
130
To: Bozeman Planning Board
From: Richard Rudnicki, AICP and Jennifer Madgic
Date: March 25, 2021
Re: Planning Board Role within Development Review
At the March 15, 2021 Planning Board meeting, we discussed the Board’s role in Development
Review and the Board’s desire for additional input earlier in the process to ensure consistency
with the Growth Policy. We agreed to meet with staff to help further our understanding of the
current review process and to ascertain how the Board might improve our review processes.
This memo summarizes our March 24 meeting with Tom Rogers and Chris Saunders, reviewing
items we discussed at our last Board meeting, as well as other discussion points which came
up.
Pre-application Meeting Involvement – The Board suggested that having representation
in the City pre-application meeting would allow the opportunity to see projects earlier in
the process when they have more opportunity for revision. After discussion with Staff we
do not believe this idea is a good solution.
• Attending these meetings would place a significant burden on members
of the Board.
• We believe this action reflects negatively on the Board’s value of staff
both internally and to the larger community.
• This may actually slow the application process due to the scheduling
requirements of Board members.
Pre-application Information for Board Review – The Board suggested that information
from the pre-application meeting could be offered to the Board for comment with the
Developer’s consent. The exact format for that review was not identified. We do not
believe a full review during our regular Board meetings would be the best use of our time
because it could impact the ability to properly review current applications. Creating a
board sub-committee that would conduct a review outside of the regular Board meeting
is a potential solution. Further specifics of this scenario would need to be determined.
Memo to Developers – The Board suggested that a memo to developers be drafted
which outlines a variety of situations seen by the Board on previous projects. This memo
could be provided by Staff to the developer at the pre-application meeting or a similar
early stage in the process for their information. We have concerns that noting these
items will not result in their inclusion in projects. Because these items are not codified,
developers would not be obligated to follow our suggestions.
Key Ordinance Amendments – Key points that were raised in our discussion included
the desire to create consistency with the Growth Policy earlier in the process and ensure
enforceability of those items. A possible approach could be identification of a few key
items which warrant immediate amendment in the zoning ordinance and unified
development code. Some initial example items include:
131
• Improved Density Bonuses for the inclusion of affordable housing.
• A requirement that affordable housing be dispersed throughout the
development, such as no more than 25 percent of affordable lot shall be
contiguous.
• Refined language on bike/ped connections particularly an emphasis on
more east-west connections.
• Requirement of smaller more affordable housing when lots are below a
certain square footage.
• Revision of the existing requirements to make alternative housing options
such as Pocket Neighborhoods and Cohousing easier to implement.
• Requirement of developments to maximize density according to what is
allowed by underlying zoning.
• Requirement of developments to provide a mix of integrated housing
types within a given subdivision.
• Requirement for providing accessory dwelling unit (ADU) when lots
exceed a certain square footage.
Staff Report Information Shift – Staff suggested that the Board could focus its review on
Growth Policy compliance as opposed to technical development details. This follows 76-
1-106 Role of planning board. (1) To ensure the promotion of public health, safety,
morals, convenience, or order or the general welfare and for the sake of efficiency and
economy in the process of community development, if requested by the governing body,
the planning board shall prepare a growth policy and shall serve in an advisory capacity
to the local governing bodies establishing the planning board.
(2) The planning board may propose policies for:
a. Subdivision plats.
Process Review – In better understanding the process of review prior to an item
reaching the Board, we believe that overview would be useful to all members. We
believe Staff should be asked to provide a process overview to the Board at an
upcoming meeting.
132
Code Changes to Support the Development of Missing Middle and Affordable Housing
Item Code Reference Ra onale Recommended Ac on
Single Family Zoning Table 38.320.030.A Single family zoning =
exclusionary zoning.
Allow two-, three-, or
four-household dwellings in
R-1 and R-2; allow up to
six-household dwellings in R-3
and R-4 provided that at least
two meet standards of
affordability.
Lot Size Minimums Table 38.320.030.A Lot size minimums =
exclusionary zoning. Required
setbacks along with lot
coverage maximums
accomplish the same intent.
(Houston = 1400 SF minimum;
711 E Lamme St = 1344 SF.)
Reduce lot size minimums to
1350 SF. Retain required
setbacks (based on block form
standards) and lot coverage
maximums.
Lot Width Minimums Table 38.320.030.B Lot width minimums = lot size
minimums = exclusionary
zoning. Narrow lots reduce
street frontage, reducing costs.
Eliminate lot width minimums,
retaining required
setbacks/u lity easements, lot
coverage maximums, and FAR
maximums.
Parking Minimums Sec. 38.540.050-1 Parking minimums =
exclusionary zoning.
Eliminate off street parking
minimum requirements
(acknowledging that demand
for parking will s ll result in its
crea on). Consider parking
maximums.
133
Parks Area Requirements Sec. 38.420.020. A.1 Current code requires 1300 SF
of parks per dwelling or 575 SF
per person. 32.5% of a 4000 SF
lot. Given land costs of $1m /
acre, literally adds $30k per
unit.
Reduce open space
requirements to 575 SF per
dwelling or 360 SF per person,
with waivers for small
developments and
developments in proximity to
exis ng public parks.
Commensurate reduc ons of
in lieu fee.
Required Setbacks 38.320.030.B
38.510.030.C
Current code has two
(differing) sets of required
setbacks. Having two sec ons
of the code regula ng the
same thing is a prime example
of an opportunity to simplify
the code.
Remove required setbacks
from form and intensity
standards (Table 38.320.030.C)
but maintain required setbacks
in the Block Frontage
Standards Table 38.510.030.C
( Landscaped block frontage
standards ).
Lot Coverage Maximums Table 38.320.030.C Density-based zoning
discourages smaller units
Tier maximum floor area ra o
based on dwelling type rather
than zoning district (e.g. SFR =
0.5; duplex = 0.75; triplex =
1.0; 4-plex+: 2.0. This
incen vizes the crea on of
missing middle housing.
Floor Area Ra o Maximums Table 38.320.030.C Cap FAR at 0.5 per dwelling.
E.g. Sea le’s limits on house
sizes
Incen vizes developers to put
more units on a given lot;
reduces McMansion
tear-downs. Encourages ADUs,
mul family.
134
Household Size Cap Sec. 38.700.090 Household Household size caps =
exclusionary zoning =
mandated empty bedrooms.
Washington State just struck
down household size caps
because, “they shut out
cheaper op ons for those who
could benefit from sharing
housing costs and paying
lower rents, such as re red
seniors, college roommates,
and low- to moderate-income
workers. These rules also
impose exclusionary
defini ons of family and
discriminate against
households with members
who may not be related in the
eyes of the law.” Bozeman’s
laws have been cri cized by
the Montana Human Rights
Bureau as discriminatory .
Removing would increase
housing op ons for low- and
middle-income residents,
making ci es more inclusive
towards all family structures
and living arrangements.
Maintain occupancy limits
based on floor area or life &
safety standards. Revise
Household (A) A person living
alone, or any of the following
group s living together as a
single nonprofit housekeeping
unit and sharing common
living, sleeping, cooking and
ea ng facili es . :
1. Any number of people
related by blood, marriage,
adop on, guardianship or
other duly-authorized
custodial rela onship;
2. Not more than
four unrelated people; or
3. Two unrelated people and
any children related to either
of them.
4. Persons or groups granted a
request for a reasonable
accommoda on to reside as a
single housekeeping unit
pursuant to sec on 38.35.090.
5. (B)
"Household" does not include:
a. Any society, club, fraternity,
sorority, associa on, lodge,
combine, federa on, coterie,
135
1.Affordable Housing Ordinance
a.Need to e standards for “affordability” to market rates, not income. Although the city doesn't publish this number,
my understanding is that the cri cal number to qualify is ~$280k, or about four tenths of market rates. There’s no
amount of incen ves we can reasonably offer to make up the $300k gap between the “Affordable” and market rate.
This number needs to e out to the actual costs of land, lumber, labor, etc.
2.Accessory Dwelling Units
a.Eliminate off street parking minimums for ADUs.
b.Waive impact fees for ADUs
c.Allow two ADUs per lot provided that at least one meets standards for universal design.
d.Provide pre-approved ADU plan sets
3.Co age Housing
coopera ve housing or like
organiza on;
b. Any group of individuals
whose associa on is
temporary or seasonal in
nature; or
c. Any group of individuals
who are in a group living
arrangement as a result of
criminal offenses.
d. Any group of individuals
living in a structure permi ed
as transi onal or emergency
housing pursuant to this
chapter.
136
a.Sec. 38.360.120.C Remove co age housing requirement that at least 1 in 4 must be “Affordable”. Co age housing is
innately more affordable; the 1 in 4 requirement makes it very difficult for co age housing developments to pencil
out. (This may have already been done for us by the legislature.)
4.Consider changing 38.320.030.C density standards to gross acre rather than net acre to account for the impact of streets,
parks, etc. Currently achieving net densi es in R-3 zones of 4 – 8 units per acre.
5.HOA Provided Services
a.Eliminate any/all code requirements that require the crea on of an HOA. Examples include: landscape watering for
median plants, stormwater facility maintenance, etc.
6.Access and Streets
a.Sec on 38.400.050 Develop narrower alterna ve street sec ons. The current 60’ standard is obscene. 30’ and 42’
ROW sec ons should be developed and encouraged.
b.38.400.090 Revisit access requirements; eliminate requirement for vehicle access.
c.38.400.100 Reduce street vision triangles
7.38.410.060B Allow flexible loca ons of u lity easements and reduce private u lity easement size from 10 feet to 5 feet.
137
MEMORANDUM
To: Hap Happel, Chair, Bozeman Planning Board
From: Cathy Costakis, Jerry Pape
Date: April 7, 2021
Re: Working Session Memo-Better Community Outreach
Strategic Plan:
An Engaged Community: We foster a culture of engagement and civic leadership based on innovation
and best practices involving community members of all backgrounds and perspectives.
1.1 Outreach and 1.2 Community Engagement
Communications is one way communication that informs, educates, and alerts. The desired outcome of
communications is to create shared understanding. Community engagement creates opportunities for
the public to contribute to city decisions. The action of community engagement can take many forms
and includes involving and collaborating between city decision makers and community members. The
desired outcome of community engagement is that communities see their influence on decisions and
policy. The grey area in between the two can be difficult to determine. It is critical that staff doing these
actions work closely together and have a symbiotic relationship. (from Bozeman’s Communication Plan)
Planning Board Task: At the March 15, 2021 Planning Board meeting, we discussed the Board’s role in
better communication to the public and better engagement with the public concerning the Growth
Policy and ongoing activities of the Planning Board and the City concerning planning related issues. Jerry
Pape and Cathy Costakis were tasked with setting up a meeting with Melody Mileur and Dani Hess to
discuss.
Jerry and I met on April 1, 2021 with Melody, Dani and Tom Rogers. First, Jerry and I gave our versions of
what we thought the goals of this project were; my ideas were more related to educating the public on
what is in the Community Plan, the Land Use Map, and planning issues in general; Jerry got more
specific as to how the Community Plan relates to the UDC, the use of surveys to get input from the
public, and specifics around where to get information related to development projects. Then we all
discussed again things like the goal of communication vs. outreach. City staff made it clear to us that if
we were not prepared to “do something” with the input we might get from the public, then we should
not “engage” with them. Frankly, we did not glean very much more from this meeting. Subsequently,
Cathy had another conversation with Dani Hess to further discuss some ideas. What follows is a
compilation of that conversation and other thoughts.
Ideas on methods to communicate and educate the public
1. Web Page and Communication Portal:
a. Executive Summary: the Planning Board could produce a very short—possibly one-page
(back to back)—summary of the salient information contained in the Community Plan.
This would be in language that is easy to understand for the layperson and graphically
presented in a way that is engaging. We could do the same with the Land Use Map,
138
explaining things like land use designations and zoning and how this relates to the Plan
and what people can do on their property. These could live on the Community
Development website where the Community Plan is housed.
b. Video: we could produce a short video explaining the Community Plan and Vision.
c. Speaker series: the Planning Board could initiate a series of presentations to educate the
public on various concepts included in the Plan. This could not only help the public
better understand the concepts in the Plan but could also be an education tool for the
Board and City staff/Commission. We could use some of our budget (if we have one) to
invite national speakers but also have local speakers as well.
d. Example: a very good example of the above concept is what Northeast Ohio did for a
regional plan. Please see Vibrant NEO where they have a copy of their plan but also have
a video, a “framework” summary, and a blog area which looks at specific issues and
contains recordings of some presentations and a place for people to make comments.
My idea is something like this but perhaps not quite so elaborate…this is, I believe, a
project for a 5-county region including the City of Cleveland.
2. Osher Lifelong Learning Institute (OLLI): we could put together a multi-session class on planning
issues in Bozeman and could focus one on the Community Plan and others that explain the Land
Use Map, zoning, and the UDC. We could explain how all of these relate and what that means to
people. We could also just do a Friday Forum (free at noon on certain Fridays) to talk about
these issues and point people to the Communications Portal (above).
3. Growth/Planning/Development (whatever we want to call it) Regional Summit: we could partner
with other organizations/jurisdictions interested and engaged in various aspects of our
Community Plan, including regional coordination, to put on a Regional Summit. The Summit
would be focused on the Themes of the Community plan (i.e., resiliency, sustainability,
transportation & land use planning, housing, parks & open space, economic development,
regional coordination, etc.). This could also help set us up for becoming a Metropolitan Planning
Organization (if that should happen).
Ideas on target audiences and how to get the messages out
1. Neighborhood Associations: we could do presentations to community groups and neighborhood
associations and pass out the summary documents developed above.
2. Target audiences: we could partner with various groups to do specific presentations targeted at
audiences such as youth groups (Bozeman Schools, and MSU), senior groups (AARP, Senior
Center), developers (BDC), specific groups such as Latinos or low-income groups, etc.
3. Engage the arts community: the arts community can be helpful in producing engaging
temporary events such as what Mountain Time Arts does to communicate ideas and concepts.
4. Social media: I am not an expert on this but we could hire someone to help us to get the
message out about the Plan.
5. Pop-up events: engaging events around town aimed at getting the message about the Plan out
to the public (I would need to think more about this one!).
6. The Regional Summit: see above
139