HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-23 CDB Agenda and Packet MaterialsA.Call to Order - 6:00 pm
This meeting will be held both in-person and also using an online video conferencing system. You
can join this meeting:
Via Webex
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, channel 190, or attend in-
person
United States Toll
1-650-479-3208
Access code: 2556 409 3795
B.Disclosures
C.Changes to the Agenda
D.Approval of Minutes
D.1 021323 CDB Minutes(Sagstetter)
E.Consent Items
F.Public Comments
This is the time to comment on any matter falling within the scope of the Community
Development Board. There will also be time in conjunction with each agenda item for public
comment relating to that item but you may only speak once per topic.
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
CDB AGENDA
Monday, February 27, 2023
General information about the Community Development Board is available in our Laserfiche
repository.
If you are interested in commenting in writing on items on the agenda please send an email to
agenda@bozeman.net or by visiting the Public Comment Page prior to 12:00pm on the day of the
meeting.
Public comments will also be accepted in-person and through Video Conference during the appropriate
agenda items.
As always, the meeting will be streamed through the Commission's video page and available in the
City on cable channel 190.
For more information please contact Anna Bentley, abentley@bozeman.net
1
Please note, the Community Development Board cannot take action on any item which does not
appear on the agenda. All persons addressing the Community Development Board shall speak in a
civil and courteous manner and members of the audience shall be respectful of others. Please
state your name and place of residence in an audible tone of voice for the record and limit your
comments to three minutes.
General public comments to the Board can be found in their Laserfiche repository folder.
G.Action Items
G.1 UDC Project - Review and Advise Regarding the Update to the Unified Development Code,
Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address Potential Changes to Standards Relating to
Zoning District and Building Transitions; and Commercial and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts,
Application 21381(Bentley)
H.FYI/Discussions
I.Adjournment
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
Citizen Advisory Board 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 406-582-3232 (TDD 406-582-
2301).
2
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Sam Sagstetter - Community Development Technician II
Lacie Kloosterhof - Community Development Office Manager
Anna Bentley - Community Development Director
SUBJECT:021323 CDB Minutes
MEETING DATE:February 27, 2023
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Minutes
RECOMMENDATION:Approve
STRATEGIC PLAN:1.1 Outreach: Continue to strengthen and innovate in how we deliver
information to the community and our partners.
BACKGROUND:None.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:None.
ALTERNATIVES:Approve with corrections.
FISCAL EFFECTS:None.
Attachments:
021323 CDB Minutes.pdf
Report compiled on: February 23, 2023
3
Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, February 13, 2023
Page 1 of 3
THE CITY COMMMISSION MEETING OF BOZEMAN, MONTANA
MINUTES
February 13, 2023
Present: Gerald Pape, Brady Ernst, Henry Happel, Jennifer Madgic, Jason Delmue
Absent: None
Excused: Allison Bryan, Nicole Olmstead, Padden Guy Murphy, Chris Egnatz
A) 00:01:52 Call to Order - 6:00 pm
B) 00:03:13 Disclosures
C) 00:03:24 Changes to the Agenda
D) 00:03:30 Approval of Minutes
D.1 CD Board Meeting Minutes 2/6/23
CD Board Meeting Minutes 020623.pdf
00:03:39 Motion to approve CD Board Meeting Minutes 020623
Jennifer Madgic: Motion
Gerald Pape: 2nd
00:04:12 Vote on the Motion to approve Approve The Motion carried 4 - 0.
Approve:
Gerald Pape
Brady Ernst
Henry Happel
Jennifer Madgic
Jason Delmue
4
Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, February 13, 2023
Page 2 of 3
Disapprove:
None
E) 00:04:35 Consent Items
E.1 00:04:38 2131 Graf Street Apartment Homes Phase II Site Plan; Project No.
22110.
22110 2131 Graf Ph 2 site plan CDB staff rpt 02 03 23.pdf
22110 CDB cover sheet memo.pdf
00:07:10 Motion to approve Approve the 2131 Graf Street Apartment Homes Phase II Site Plan with
recommended conditions of approval.
Jennifer Madgic: Motion
Brady Ernst: 2nd 00:07:57 Vote on the Motion to approve Approve the 2131 Graf Street Apartment Homes Phase II Site
Plan with recommended conditions of approval. The Motion carried 4 - 0.
Approve:
Gerald Pape
Brady Ernst
Henry Happel
Jennifer Madgic
Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
None
F) 00:08:19 Public Comments
G) 00:09:10 Action Items
G.1 00:09:16 A Zone Text Amendment to modify the City's development code to
restrict Greek Letter Organizations to the R-5, R-O as principal uses, and conditionally in
the R-3 zoning district. Application 22270. Text amendment will apply to all applicable
zoning districts.
Kathy P Request to Postpone the continued Public Hearing on ZTA # 22270 Fraternity &
Sorority Houses.pdf
00:14:58 Motion to approve I move to continue application 22270, the Fraternity and Sorority Text
Amendment, to a date uncertain with the future date to be set in association with further notice.
Gerald Pape: Motion
5
Bozeman City Commission Meeting Minutes, February 13, 2023
Page 3 of 3
Jason Delmue: 2nd
00:16:34 Vote on the Motion to approve I move to continue application 22270, the Fraternity and Sorority
Text Amendment, to a date uncertain with the future date to be set in association with further notice. The
Motion carried 4 - 0.
Approve:
Gerald Pape
Brady Ernst
Henry Happel
Jennifer Madgic
Jason Delmue
Disapprove:
None
H) 00:16:31 FYI/Discussions
00:21:26 Planner Tom Rogers answers questions from the board.
I) 00:24:54 Adjournment
This board generally meets the first and third Monday of the month from 6:00 pm to 8:00 pm.
6
Memorandum
REPORT TO:Community Development Board
FROM:Chris Saunders, Community Development Manager
Erin George, Community Development Deputy Director
Anna Bentley, Community Development Director
SUBJECT:UDC Project - Review and Advise Regarding the Update to the Unified
Development Code, Chapter 38, Bozeman Municipal Code to Address
Potential Changes to Standards Relating to Zoning District and Building
Transitions; and Commercial and Mixed-Use Zoning Districts, Application
21381
MEETING DATE:February 27, 2023
AGENDA ITEM TYPE:Policy Discussion
RECOMMENDATION:Receive presentation, discuss proposed alternatives, and provide direction
to staff and consultants.
STRATEGIC PLAN:4.1 Informed Conversation on Growth: Continue developing an in-depth
understanding of how Bozeman is growing and changing and proactively
address change in a balanced and coordinated manner.
BACKGROUND:On December 21, 2021, the City Commission adopted Resolution 5368. The
resolution established priorities for municipal actions over the next two
years. Priorities include adopting changes to the Unified Development Code
to “facilitate increased housing density, housing affordability, climate action
plan objectives, sustainable building practices, and a transparent,
predictable and understandable development review process.” This agenda
item is part of the UDC update process and is a work session regarding how
higher and lower density developments can successfully be adjacent.
Discussion will also include possible changes to or deletions of commercial
and mixed-use zoning districts. A memo providing background material is
attached.
Consultants presented to the City Commission on February 14th and
received overall direction and input. The consultants will brief the
Community Development Board on the direction given and discuss further
refinements with Board input. The video of the February 14th presentation
is available online. The discussion of the UDC work session begins at 3:33:30
in the recording. The packet materials provided to the City Commission are
also attached to this memo.
Ongoing information about the UDC project can be found on at the
7
engage.bozeman.net website, the official portal for the project. Comments
and input can also be submitted through engage.bozeman.net and
summaries of prior City Commission and other meetings are provided
including presentation materials. Included with this agenda item are
summaries of several engagement tools and outcomes from the project so
far. Additional meetings and other options for engagement will be provided
as the project moves forward.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:Board will give input on specific issues relating to zoning district and building
transitions; and commercial and mixed-use zoning districts.
ALTERNATIVES:As identified by the Community Development Board
FISCAL EFFECTS:Funds for this work are budgeted and appropriated.
Attachments:
2-14-2023 Work Session cover memo .pdf
Group Engagement Log 2-07-2023.pdf
Tall Buildings Map 7-15-2022 small.pdf
230208_Midway Report, Engagement Station DRAFT.pdf
Report compiled on: February 23, 2023
8
City Commission Zoning District and Building Transitions and Commercial and Mixed-Use
Districts Work Session Background Materials
Overall Project Background: On December 21, 2021, the City Commission adopted Resolution
5368. The resolution established priorities for the next two years. Priorities include adopting
changes to the Unified Development Code to “facilitate increased housing density, housing
affordability, climate action plan objectives, sustainable building practices, and a transparent,
predictable and understandable development review process.”
The UDC revision process (“the UDC Project”) focuses on implementing policy established by
adopted plans including Bozeman Community Plan 2020, Climate Action Plan, Community
Housing Action Plan, and the in-progress Parks, Recreation, and Active Transportation. The
UDC project is focused on specific improvements, with direction to be completed by December
2023.
Objectives for the UDC revision project are:
• Implementation of growth policy, climate action plan, housing action plan, and other
adopted city plans.
• Improving readability and usability of the code for infrequent users while maintaining
legal soundness.
• Update and revisions to zoning district descriptions and options consistent with the
growth policy.
• Improve graphics to improve clarity and understanding of standards.
Work Session General Policy Background: This work session is to assess potential changes to
how the City’s regulations address adjacency of zoning districts of differing intensities. Zoning
districts often are distinguished in part by differences in building heights and massing of
buildings. The City strives to place zoning boundaries along streets and similar physical
separators that provide an inherent softening of the differences between districts. However,
zoning decisions made in the past do include zoning district boundaries along alleys and
property lines with less built in separation.
As the community has continued to grow and land prices have increased there has been a
greater degree of building up. An allowance for taller buildings in some districts has existed for
many years and is only now being used. This evolution in the built environment has called
attention to the issue of mass and scale transitions and considerable public comment has been
received in association with individual projects.
The City has adopted over the years a range of zoning districts to meet different needs. Districts
created over the past 15 years have focused on allowing greater mixing of uses; relying more on
development standards on form and performance rather than uses to address issues of
development. It is appropriate to evaluate the palette of commercial and mixed-use districts
and determine which should be continued, which amended, and which deleted. Excessive
9
numbers of districts with only minor differences add complexity without compensating
benefits.
Both of the issues for discussion this evening are a continuation of the City’s evolution to a
more form-based rather than dominantly use-based zoning code. This process has been under
way since adoption of the 2009 growth policy which called for evaluation and implementation
of form-based zoning.
Growth Policy: The City adopted a new growth policy, the Bozeman Community Plan 2020, in
November 2020. State law requires zoning ordinances to be "in accord" with the growth policy.
The Bozeman Community Plan 2020 includes direction to amend land development regulations.
The City also recently adopted plans for climate action and housing, and an update to the parks
plan is underway. Land use regulations play a role in implementing those plans as well.
The updated growth policy and related plans establish the policy direction for amendments to
be implemented with these code updates. The UDC project allows the City to put the tools in
place to take action on adopted policy. This work is not intended to create new policy or change
the policy direction already established.
Example of Bozeman Community Plan 2020 policy direction influencing this work session on
zoning districts include:
R-1.7 Be flexible: willingness and ability to adopt alternative strategies in response to
changing circumstances.
DCD-1.2 Remove regulatory barriers to infill.
DCD-2.2 Support higher density development along main corridors and at high visibility
street corners to accommodate population growth and support businesses.
DCD-2.3 Review and update minimum development intensity requirements in residential
and nonresidential zoning districts.
DCD-2.4 Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts to
account for contemporary building methods and building code changes.
DCD-2.8 Revise the zoning ordinance, reducing the number of zoning districts to be more
consistent with the designated land use classifications, to simplify the development
process, and support affordability objectives of the plan.
DCD-2.9 Evaluate increasing the number of stories allowed in centers of employment and
activity while also directing height transitions down to adjacent neighborhoods.
10
DCD-3.5 Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near
major employers.
DCD-4.3 Complete the transition to a form-based code and simplification so that it can be
understood by the general public and consistently applied by planning staff.
M-1.1 Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns. Encourage and enable the development of
housing, jobs, and services in close proximity to one another.
EE-2.2 Review and revise, or possibly replace, the Business Park Mixed Use zoning district
to include urban standards and consider possible alterations to the allowed uses.
RC-4.4 Update the Unified Development Code (UDC) to:
• Implement a twice-yearly code revision cycle. Identify and make revisions to
optimize the UDC current conditions.
• Incorporate development minimums in designated growth areas.
• Revise the zoning map to harmonize with the future land use map.
Work Session Topics:
Based on a review of the various policy documents and their extensive professional experience,
the Code Studio team proposes two items for Commission consideration. None of the
suggestions are finalized and all will be further developed prior to incorporation as part of the
overall code update draft.
1. Method of approach for transitions between zoning districts.
2. Consolidation, amendment, or deletion of non-residential zoning districts.
Background Information on Topics:
1. Tall buildings have been a noticeable element of building in Bozeman for a very long time.
See the attached map of tall buildings prepared in July 2022, showing location, size, and height
throughout the community. Four plus story buildings have been a feature of Bozeman since the
1800’s. Although the tallest buildings have clustered around Downtown and Montana State
University buildings of considerable height are located throughout the community. For many
years the full allowance of development was infrequently used. That is changing as land prices
increase and construction methods improve. The City policy for development has for many
years encouraged infill development which has supported taller buildings within existing
developed areas.
In 2018, in response to the evolving community, the City Commission adopted specific
standards to address the mass and scale of buildings at the edges of zoning districts. These are
in Section 38.32.060. The existing standards specify when the transition applies based on the
adjacency of certain districts. Not all districts are subject to the transition standard. The
standard is specific to only the immediate edge of a zone and does not apply to buildings on the
11
geographic interior of a zoning district. The primary focus of the transition standard is a
requirement to taper the height of a building away from the zoning district with smaller
allowed heights. No transition is required if the district boundary is a street. DCD-2.9 of the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020 directs evaluation of heights and transitions as part of
consideration of height changes.
Code Studio will present some alternatives to provide a more refined approach addressing a
broader range of circumstances and transition methods. The Commission will be asked to give
direction on which methods to further pursue and the scope of applicability for the standard.
2. The City has twelve non-residential and mixed use zoning districts to meet different
requirements of the community. The uses allowed in the various districts are in Division 38.310
and the form and intensity standards such as heights and setbacks are in Division 38.320. Some
districts were created decades ago and others are recently created. As described above, the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020 suggests evaluation and possible revision of zoning districts as
part of the implementation of the plan. There is a need to evaluate whether the existing
districts are still meeting community needs and whether some should be deleted, consolidated,
or updated. The migration of the City’s land development regulations to be more form-based
instead of use-based as called for in DCD-4.3 supports a focus on transitions between districts
as well as the actual districts. The potential changes to districts would likely result in changes to
the zoning map to reflect the change in the number and types of districts.
Code Studio will present alternatives for possible changes to individual districts. The
Commission will be asked to give direction on what general changes will be made to specific
districts. More refined amendments will then be identified and prepared for consideration by
the community as part of the code adoption process.
Work Session Schedule: The magnitude of the anticipated changes necessitates periodic input
from the Commission and public to ensure the project remains on course and timely. A series of
focused work sessions are proposed at critical junctures in the process to gather information
and confirm project direction. Each work session will focus on one element of policy
implementation. The sequence of subjects will correlate and coordinate with ongoing work,
with the added goal of identifying key elements early in the process and working efficiently.
City Commission work sessions are below; dates are provided for those already in the
Commission’s six-month schedule.
Tuesday, September 13th – Organization and Page Layout (completed)
Tuesday, October 18th – Residential Zoning Districts (completed)
Tuesday, November 15th – Sustainability (completed)
Tuesday, February 14th – Transitions between districts and Commercial Zoning Districts
Tuesday, February 28th – Parking
Tuesday, March 7th – Transportation
12
Ongoing summaries of work sessions and other public engagement and information about the
project is available at engage.bozeman.net/UDC. A report on the intercept outreach program
and a report of other outreach to date is attached to this item.
Public Engagement: The City used a variety of techniques to engage the public during the code
update process. A detailed report on the intercept technique is attached to this agenda item. A
summary of various meetings and other engagement so far is also attached. Outreach and
engagement will continue as the project moves forward. The primary outreach tool, consistent
with the adopted communication plan for this work, is engage.bozeman.net.
13
Group Engagement Events (chronological)
8/11/2022 Engage Bozeman website for project goes live
Website provides summary of actions, engagement opportunities and outcomes, tool for comment
submittal, and other functions continuously throughout the project.
9/12/2022 Stakeholder Meeting #1 (Designers)
Attendees:
• Chris Budeski - Madison Engineering
• Doug Minarik - Minarik Architecture
• Marty Matsen - Fall Creek Planning (Former Director)
• Rob Pertzborn - Intrinsik Architecture
• Chris Nauman - Sanderson Stewart
• Cordell Poole - Stahly Engineering
• Brian Caldwell - ThinkTank Design
• Mark Egge - FBC guy
9/12/2023 Community Development Board Work Session
Discussion of project overall approach, outreach, formatting
9/13/2022 Stakeholder Meeting #2 (Producers)
Attendees
• Mike Magrans - Outlaw Development
• Someone else from Outlaw Development (didn't catch name)
• Grant Syth - Bridger Builders
• Andrew Gault - Home Base Partners
• Brian Klein - Providence Development
• Parker Lange - Providence Development
• Greg Allen - Cadius Partners
• Jason Leep - Williams Homes (see WHA land planners)
9/13/2022 City Commission Work Session
Meeting minutes – Formatting and layout recommendations and direction
10/13/2022 Inter-Neighborhood Council
Attendees not listed.
14
10/17/2022 NENA Meeting
Attendees
• Linda Semones – Bogert park resident
• Amy Kelley Hoitsma – former NA president; Peach Street
• Sarah Rosenberg – preservation planner at City of Bozeman
• Cathy Costakis – former planning board member
• Karen Flipovich – student liaison on character report, lives on N Grand
• Suzanne Held – NENA member
• Sarah Church – prof of land use planning at MSU
• Susanne Cowan – prof at MSU, worked on report, architectural history
10/18/2022 Design Professionals call (with City staff)
42 Persons attended
10/18/2022 City Commission Work Session
Meeting minutes – Residential districts recommendations and direction
10/24/2022 Intercept Activities by Interboro
In person outreach at sites across the City. See separate report for outcomes. Work is ongoing.
10/27/2022 Code Connect
Public e-meeting to present summary of Commission direction on residential districts and have public
question and answer.
11/7/2022 Community Development Board
Presentation on work done to date.
11/15/2022 City Commission Work Session
Meeting minutes – Sustainability recommendations and direction
15
11/21/2022 Community Development Board
Presentation on work done to date.
11/30/2022 MSU Stakeholder Engagement Course (Prof. Sarah Church)
Dani conducted intercept activity and presented on project outreach efforts with MSU students.
12/1/2022 Code Connect
Public e-meeting to present summary of Commission direction on sustainability and have public
question and answer.
12/14/2022 Sustainability Board Meeting
Discussion of Commission direction on sustainability, EV charging, and urban agriculture
1/9/2023 Community Development Board Work Session
Residential Districts recommendations, direction from Commission, and further refinement.
1/30/2023 Northwestern Energy Stakeholder Meeting
Discussion on adequacy of existing standards, requirements for service and meters and how to address,
EV impacts on site design
2/1/2023 Economic Development Board Work Session
Possible changes to parking requirements
16
17
Produced by:INTERBORO Produced for:
Building Our Future TogetherMidway Project Report on theMobile Engagement StationDRAFT
18
II IIIINTERBORO
City of Bozeman StaffAnna Bentley, Director of Community DevelopmentErin George, Deputy Director of Community Development Chris Saunders, Community Development ManagerDani Hess, Community Engagement Coordinator Kelley Rischke, Assistant City Attorney Natalie Meyer, Sustainability Program ManagerTom Rogers, Senior Planner
Interboro PartnersDan D’Oca, PrincipalCaleb Mitchell, PlannerRebecca Hennings, Engagement CoordinatorDaisy Parnell, Engagement Street TeamLacey Peterson, Engagement Street TeamKrista Hunton-Lange, Engagement Street Team Jenavieve Lynch, Engagement Street Team
Code StudioColin Scarff, PrincipalRyan Johnson, AssociateKelsey Morrow, Senior Associate
Logan SimpsonJennifer Gardner, Senior AssociateJoe Moss, Planner Sophia Frankenburg, Planner
Acknowledgements
DRAFT19
IV VINTERBORO
Table of Contents
Overview 6
Building Our Future TogetherTeamEngagement Role
Engagement Strategy 8
About the BrochuresBrochure AnatomyAbout the StationSummary of EventsAbout the Online Station
Engagement Findings 20
By the NumbersFindings per KeywordCommon Topics DiscussedSpatial Recommendations
Next Steps 36
DRAFT20
6 7INTERBORO
Engagement Role
Updates to the Unified Development Code affect
every member of the Bozeman community. Over time
revisions to the UDC shape the city through setting
the parameters for all future development. Given how
these modernizations significantly govern Bozeman’s
built environment, it is important to collect robust
community input on these technical but decisive
adjustments to city code. The latest round of changes
to the UDC respond directly to a number of guiding
documents which outline the City of Bozeman’s vision
and goals for future development. These include
the Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy),
the Climate Plan, as well as a number of strategic
priorities such as affordable housing and equity.
Given these already articulated goals, the intention of
our public outreach was not to ask people what they
wanted abstractly from the UDC update, but rather
how they wanted certain ambitions for the future of
Bozeman to be concretely codified. In asking this
question of how, our aim for the outreach activity was
to make it as fun and engaging as possible.
Team
Interboro Partners is an award-winning, multi-
disciplinary design firm that offers inventive and
inclusive planning, design, and community outreach.
Their work is founded on good listening, keen
observation, and productive community engagement.
They use a participatory, place-specific approach
to create consensus around complex projects
ranging from buildings, parks, and open spaces to
neighborhood, city, and regional plans. They work
closely with clients and communities to creatively
program, design, and realize beautiful, inclusive
environments that are inviting to everyone. Interboro
is based in Brooklyn, Detroit, and Boston, and work
nationally and internationally.
Code Studio pursues planning and implementation
work that yields vibrant, mixed use, walkable
communities through creative urban infill, incremental
redevelopment and transformational change.
Founded in 2006, the firm is nationally renowned
for its highly visual page layout, simple graphics
and easily understood and enforced text. The firm
works across the United States completing combined
plan and code projects, as well as working on codes
in places planned and designed by others. Code
Studio’s approach focuses on translating planning
and design concepts into regulatory language
to create the physical “place” envisioned by a
community.
Logan Simpson has passionately provided a wide
range of environmental, landscape architecture,
and planning services for many projects throughout
the West for more than a quarter of a century. Their
staff’s exceptional capabilities and expertise is the
foundation of their ability to provide high-quality
service to our clients.
Building Our Future Together
The city of Bozeman seeks to implement its recently
adopted Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth
policy) and other supporting specific topic plans in
its most recent updates of the Unifed Development
Code. These plans include the Climate Plan and the
city’s goals around housing supply and affordability.
The land use regulations in the UDC include zoning
districts, subdivision review procedures, park and
transportation standards, and other generally
applicable land development standards. Updates
to the standards and regulations in the UDC will
help bring alignment with the community’s goals
established in our guiding plans and policies.
Overview
DRAFT21
8 9INTERBORO
Topic Goal Category Recommendation
accessory dwelling units densifying zoning districts Promote development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
beltway / greenway connecting transportation Identify possible routes for future bicycle and pedestrian beltway/greenway.
bicycle infrastructure connecting sustainability Prioritize and construct key bicycle infrastructure, to include wayfinding signage, connections, and enhance-
ments.
bus shelters connecting transportation Establish standards and procedures for placement of bus shelters in City rights of way.
corner-oriented development densifying zoning districts Evaluate alternatives for more intensive development in proximity to high visibility corners, services, and parks.
corridor-oriented development densifying zoning districts Support higher density development along main corridors.
employment-oriented design densifying zoning districts Encourage increased development intensity in commercial centers and near major employers.
environmentally sensitive areas preserving sustainability Work with partner organizations to identify and reduce impacts on at-risk, environmentally sensitive areas.
floodplain regulations preserving sustainability Update floodplain and other regulations that protect the environment.
height limits densifying zoning districts Evaluate revisions to maximum building height limits in all zoning districts.
housing diversity diversifying zoning districts Promote housing diversity, including missing middle housing.
linear parks connecting park standards Coordinate the location of existing and future parks to create opportunities for linear parks to connect parks.
minimum density densifying zoning districts Increase required minimum densities in residential districts.
mixed-use development diversifying zoning districts Prioritize mixed-use land use patterns.
multimodal accessibility connecting transportation Expand multimodal accessibility between districts and throughout the City.
neighborhood-scale commercial diversifying zoning districts Identify and zone appropriate locations for neighborhood-scale commercial development.
open space standards regulating park standards Review and update landscape and open space standardss to reduce water use.
park programs programing park standards Incorporate unique and inclusive recreational and artistic elements into parks.
parking requirements densifying parking Evaluate parking requirements and methods of providing parking for and between districts.
planning for climate change regulating sustainability Integrate climate change considerations into development standards.
safe crossings connecting transportation Develop safe crossings along priority and high utilization pedestrian and biking corridors.
school-oriented development densifying zoning districts Revise the zoning map to support higher intensity residential districts near schools, services, and transportation.
single-family housing densifying zoning districts Revise the zoning map to lessen areas exclusively zoned for single-type housing.
small lot sizes densifying zoning districts Support compact neighborhoods, small lot sizes, and small floor plans.
solar power generation regulating sustainability Revise block and lot design standards, including orientation for solar power generation throughout city.
transportation network connecting transportation Develop safe, connected, and complementary transportation networks
trunk network connecting transportation Develop a trunk network of high-frequency, priority transit service connecting major commercial nodes
urban agriculture programing sustainability Encourage urban agriculture as part of focal point, in close proximity to schools, and near dense housing.
About the Brochures
The strategic direction of our public outreach
required the specific explanation of certain urban
development topics, as well as targeted questions
that responded directly to Bozeman’s proposed
objectives. We developed the methodology of the
mass-distributed informative brochure as a way to
first: educate the public on a range of technical
development subjects, second: garner informed,
thoughtful, and critical responses from many
members of the Bozeman community, and third:
collect this information in an informal, colorful, and
enjoyable way. In devising the list of topics for the
brochure activity we combed through the Bozeman
Community Plan 2020 (growth policy) to identify a
set of keywords. We then tagged these selected
keywords in a variety of ways including by topic
(ex. planning, zoning, sustainability, ect.), by area
(transportation, housing, commercial, ect.), or by goal
(connecting, preserving, densifying, ect.).
Engagement Strategy
DRAFT22
10 11INTERBORO
Brochure Anatomy
Conceived as a unified series, the layout of these
brochures is organized with a standardized format.
The cover page prominently displays the keyword
title on the top left hand corner within a uniform color
block designating the particular “area” categorization
the topic belongs to. As one opens the brochure,
the initial page spread introduces the topic with a
simple definition and diagram. This is followed by
some precedent images from Bozeman or in other
comparable urban contexts. Relevant goals of the
Bozeman Community Plan 2020 (growth policy) are
stated along with an explanation contextualizing
the recommendation. These brochures also include
precedents of relevant code language from other
cities in comparison to that of Bozeman’s. On the
back cover, the “area” categorization is marked (park
standards, parking, sustainability, transportation, or
zoning districts) as well as a self addressed return
mailing address to City Hall.DRAFT23
12 13INTERBORODRAFT 24
14 15INTERBORO
BROCHURESThese informational brochures explain a range of urban development topics and ask people their thoughts on specific relevent issues.
MAPThis map of Bozeman serves as a reference tool for the brochures as well as for conversation.
COMMUNITY PLANThis printed out copy of the Bozeman Community Plan serves as a reference tool and as a way to explain the larger intention of the project.
SIGNThis sign is used to attract pass-ers-by and to contextualize the entire engagement station.
TOPIC MENUThis Topic “Menu” offers a lowstakes and casual way for passers-by to choose a topic that interests them as a way to start the conversation.
About the Station
To conduct our engagement activity we developed
an eye-catching mobile engagement station with the
ability to be easily set up and broken down for easy
transportation across the city. Our station, consisting
of a purpose built tabletop, brochure display stand,
and annotated map of the city, was conceived to
present the vocabulary of urban development in the
urban context of the public market, street, or festival.
So far in the project we have transported the station
in various forms to ten different engagement events
including school workshops, trailhead intercepts, and
pop-up events between market stalls.
Map of Bozeman used for Engagement Station
What is thefuture ofbozeman?
URBAN AGRICULTURE
CORRIDOR-ORI
E
N
T
E
D
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
HEIGHT LIMIT
S
HOUSING DIV
E
R
SI
T
Y
NEIGHBORHO
O
D-
S
C
A
L
E
R
E
T
AI
L
SCHOOL-ORIENTED
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
ADUS
MIXED-US
E
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
SOLAR
P
A
N
E
L
S
EV Charging
Safe crossings Open
S
p
a
c
e
Urban
A
g
r
i
c
u
l
t
u
r
e
park Progra
m
s
Tree Coverage
Housing Diversity
Poster used for engagement activitiesDRAFT
25
16 17INTERBORO
Downtown Bozeman Intercept 10/13/22 Bozeman Fall Made Fair 10/15/22
Langohr Community Garden Intercept 10/15/22 Christmas Stroll Intercept 12/3/22
Summary of Events
Inter-Neighborhood Council MeetingThursday 10/13/22City Commission Meeting Room in City Hall4:30-6:00 pm
On Thursday October 13th we participated in
the Inter-Neighborhood Council Meeting at the
City Commission Meeting Room in City Hall. We
presented the concept and plan for the community
engagement intercept activity before performing the
activity in small groups with members of the Inter-
neighborhood council.
Downtown Bozeman InterceptFriday 10/14/22Soroptomist Park on Main & Rouse Ave12:00-2:00 pm
On Friday October 14th we set up the engagement
station at the parklet at the intersection of Black and
Babcock where we spoke with numerous passersby
about a variety of brochure topics.
Regional Park InterceptFriday 10/14/22Gallatin County Regional Park3:00-5:00 pm
In the afternoon we went to the Gallatin County
Regional Park where we heard there was historically
minimal community engagement. We spent several
hours at the trailhead.
Bozeman Fall Made FairSaturday 10/15/22Brick Breeden Fieldhouse, MSU9:00-11:00 am
On Saturday October 15th, we attended the
Bozeman Fall Made Fair where we set up a booth
among Montana artisans and makers. Here we had
the opportunity to speak with a range of Bozeman
residents about various topics and handed out
numerous brochures to passersby.
Langohr Community Garden InterceptSaturday 10/15/22Langhor Community Garden Trailhead 12:00-2:00 pm
In the afternoon later that day we continued to
Langohr Community Garden where we set up the
mobile engagement station along the Nature Park
Trail. We spoke with a stream of pedestrians, bikers,
and dog walkers.
Peets Hill/Burke Park InterceptSaturday 10/15/22Peets Hill Parking Lot3:00-500pm
Finally that day we set up the engagement at the
base of Peets Hill where there was a large amount of
afternoon traffic with residents enjoying the outdoor
weather.
Winter Farmers MarketSaturday 11/19/22Gallatin County Fairgrounds9:00 am - 12:00 pm
On the morning of Saturday November 19th, we
set up a booth at the Winter Farmers Market at the
Gallatin County Fairgrounds.
Stakeholder Engagement Course - with Professor Sarah Church and students Wednesday 11/30/22
5:30-6:30
Dr. Sarah Church hosted the UDC engagement team
to facilitate discussions on UDC topics and provide
an opportunity for students to learn about the project
and share their reflections in group discussion and by
filling out pamphlets.
Christmas Stroll InterceptSaturday 12/3/22Downtown Bozeman4:30-7:30 pm
On December 3rd, the engagement station was
installed at the Christmas Stroll in Downtown
Bozeman where passersby spoke to the team about
their future concerns for the shape of the city.DRAFT26
18 19INTERBORO
About the Online Station
In addition to our physical engagement station, we
also constructed a digital version of the brochure
materials. The website (https://bozeman-code.net)
presents in both Spanish and English the same set
of brochures in a grid to replicate the display of the
physical station. After clicking on the cover page of
one of the brochures, the user is directed to a new
page where they can scroll through the brochure
before filling out some questions at the end. DRAFT27
20 21INTERBORO
70 and up
1.1%
60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 39
15.4%
13 - 19
31.9%
20 - 29
16.5%
urban agriculture
8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
70 and up
1.1%60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 39
15.4%
13 - 19
31.9%
20 - 29
16.5%
urban agriculture
8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
17
10
15
19
14
13
13 22
25
8
11
28
1413
8
4
74
56
7
70 and up
1.1%60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 3915.4%
13 - 1931.9%
20 - 29
16.5%
urban agriculture8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
70 and up
1.1%60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 3915.4%
13 - 1931.9%
20 - 2916.5%
urban agriculture
8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
17
10
15
19
14
13
13 22
25
8
11
28
1413
8
4
74
56
7
70 and up
1.1%60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 3915.4%
13 - 1931.9%
20 - 29
16.5%
urban agriculture
8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
70 and up
1.1%
60 - 69
20.9%
50 - 59
4.4%
40 - 49
9.9%
30 - 39
15.4%
13 - 1931.9%
20 - 2916.5%
urban agriculture
8.9%
solar power
11.7%
school-oriented
8.4%
neighborhood
7.8%
mixed-use
7.8%
adu
9.5%corner-oriented
6.1%
corridor-oriented
7.3%employment
-oriented
5.0%
height limits
14.5%
housing diversity
12.8%
development
-scale retail
59718
12.3%
59715
87.7%
development
Responses by ZIP
Responses by Age Group
Responses by Topic
17
10
15
19
14
13
13 22
25
8
11
28
1413
8
4
74
56
7
Responses by age group:
Responses by topic:
Responses by ZIP code:
Members of the Bozeman community across age groups provided their opinions through these brochures.
Across the eleven brochures, height limits was the most popular topic and employment oriented development was the least.
The majority of respondents live on the eastern side of Bozeman, whereas there were relatively few responeses from the western side of the city.
Engagement Findings
250
179
3406
7
Conversations around the city
Completed Brochures
Intercept Sessions
Focus Groups
Unique Insights
By the Numbers:DRAFT28
22 23INTERBORO
Q1: Where would you like to see more intensive
development? Around which corners, services, and
parks?
• 7 responses to this question• 2 respondents mentioned Pete’s Hill• 3 respondents mentioned Lindley
• Southside Park, Story Mansion, “along 7th on
the south side of the tracks,” Rouse and Main
(and further east), 19th, 7th, Huffine, Lindley Park,
and Gallatin County Regional Park were also
mentioned.
What people said about Corner-oriented
Development:
“If done well this could be an awesome way to
build a neighborhood community and bridge the
commercial and residential.”
“Buildings on corners should be taller to highlight
being an important destination but still small enough
to blend in.”
“I feel like buildings should not be taller than 3
stories anywhere in Bozeman, but that boat has
sailed.”
Q1: Have you considered adding an ADU? If not,
why? Is there something the city could do to make it
easier for you?
• 14 responses to this question• 9 respondents either have an ADU or have
considered adding one
• Of the 5 respondents who don’t have on haven’t
considered it, 3 cited existing restrictions as a
reason.
Q2: Which regulations do you think are important for
ADUs in Bozeman?
• 11 responses to this question• 4 respondents expressed concerns that ADUs
are used primarily for short-term rentals.• 4 respondents expressed concerns about
parking.• 4 respondents had recommendations for
tightening existing regulations• 4 respondents had recommendations for
loosening existing regulations
What people said about ADUs:
“I think a study should be done to determine if
vacation rentals are interfering with other long term
rental inventory; there should be incentives to use
ADUs for long term rentals and not vacation.”
“Height limitation is key; Water usage + parking
on site and in neighborhood need consideration as
well”
“Where are people supposed to park? How is this
managed in the winter with snow?”
Findings per Keyword
DRAFT29
24 25INTERBORO
Q1: Which employment areas should have
development intensity increased?
• 6 responses to this question
• Little consensus or overlap in answers
• West side of Bozeman, industrial areas, North
19th, eastern emplyment areas, closer to
downtown, central Bozeman, and the north side
of the highway were all mentioned.
What would you like to see in these employment
areas?
• Grocery stores, restaurants, parks, mixed use
development, increased housing density were
mentioned.
• One respondent also mentioned the importance
of more bikeable and walkable areas and greater
proximity to workplaces.
What people said about Employee-oriented
Development?
“Housing, employment, and services all within
walking distance sounds like a great idea to me. Do
it everywhere it makes sense.”
“Density should be increased across town and
economic centers should be equally dispersed. We
aren’t that big that there should be employment
deserts in this town. Parts of Bozeman are still
growing at suburban density which is a very
irresponsible land use pattern and reinforces inequity
in access to parks and trails vs. exposure to vehicular
congestion, noise and hardscape.”
Q1: Where would you like to see more intensive
development? Around which corridors?
• 11 responses to this question• 2 respondents mentioned Oak and Durston• 2 respondents mentioned N 7th Street• 2 respondents mentioned 19th, Ferguson
Farms, Valley Center, Wilson, 191, and Main/
Huffine were also mentioned
Q2: Which of the above precedents do you think are
good ones for corridors in Bozeman?
• 11 responses to this question• 1 respondent noted that what makes Block 68, a
precedent from Boise Idaho attractive is the park
in front and the setbacks.• 1 respondent singled out the Ruh Building’s
variable heights, brick exterior, and overall
3-story height.• 1 respondent noted that the Osborn “blends
well by only having 3 stories streetside.”
What people said about Corridor-oriented
Development:
“I think more intensive development on W. Oak and
Durston makes a lot of sense because our two high
schools are close to these areas. If more families
lives along these corridors--and had commercial
opportunities near them that would allow them to
drive less--we could cut down on traffic and CO2
production as well as make these neighborhoods
more livable.”DRAFT30
26 27INTERBORO
Q1: Which Housing types would you like to see more
if in Bozeman?
• 22 responses to this question• 6 respondents wanted more apartments• 4 respondents wanted more affordable housing• 2 respondents wanted more duplexes • 2 respondents wanted more multi-use buildings• 2 respondents wanted more townhouses • 2 respondents wanted single-family houses
Q2: Where in Bozeman would you like to see
different types of housing?
• 23 responses to this question• 4 respondents wrote “throughout”• 6 respondents singled out Downtown• 4 respondents singled out MSU• 2 respondents singled out Gallatin High School
• The Hospital, Alder Creek, Chief Joseph, the
West Side, and “undeveloped areas” were also
mentioned
What people said about Housing Diversity?
“I think we’re getting too many identical 3 and 4
story apartment buildings, especially on the west
side. I’d like to see mixed housing types throughout
town.”
“As Bozeman’s housing crisis continues I am more
open to seeing townhomes and multi family homes
that preserve that character, light, view, and open
space of the town while increasing density of housing
and access to these charms of Bozeman.”
“Densification through height increases would be
great for our town, as long as we get a proper
affordability mix in these developments rather than
only high-end development styles.”
Q1: Where would you like to see taller buildings in
Bozeman?
• 23 responses to this question• 2 respondents wrote “nowhere;” 1 respondent
wrote “anywhere”• 3 respondents were ok with increased heights so
long as they accommodate affordable housing.
Other sites mentioned were Oak and Rouse, and
around Winders and 19th
What people said about height limits?
“People don’t like tall buildings here. Not everyone
is down with density. New housing doesn’t create
affordability. Filtering doesn’t work. Traffic is a
problem: it’s not what we moved here for.”
“Densification through height increases would be
great for our town, as long as we get a proper
affordability mix in these developments rather than
only high-end development styles.”
“ I would like to keep it isolated to downtown and
main street area. I think if we can minimize the
maximum height, it will keep the small town feel of
Bozeman which is very important to me.”DRAFT31
28 29INTERBORO
Q1: Where else could you see Neighborhood- Scale
Commercial development in Bozeman?
• 12 responses to this question• 1 respondent wrote “everywhere”• 2 respondents each singled out Downtown,
Meadow Creek, Gran Cielo, and Gallatin High
School
• Joe’s Parkway, the area along Willson in South
Bozeman, the area south of the hospital, the area
around Peet’s, and the neighborhoods behind
target / costco / winco were also singled out
Q2: Is there anything you would change about these
regulations?
• 7 responses to this question• 2 respondents remarked that the existing
regulations seem reasonable• 2 respondents singled out the Wild Crumb as a
good example of neighborhood retail• 1 respondent wrote that “if B1 allowed much
smaller businesses then I would be open to
businesses contained in a house or garage.”
What people said about Neighborhood-scale retail ?
“I think neighborhood retail can be much smaller
than what is outlined here; I would love to see corner
coffee shops and bodegas interspersed with housing.
the n/e neighborhood around Wild Crumb is a great
example of this.”
“I would change the requirement of there being
offices so close to the homes and neighborhoods.
Residents should be able to have a workplace more
separate from their home.”
“I think that the regulations as of now are well set.
Our population is expanding rapidly and our city still
needs enough housing as well as business and the
regulations set now support both of these.”
Q1: Which single-use districts should become multi-
use districts?
• 8 responses to this question• 3 respondents said “all”• 1 respondent underlined the need for buffers• 1 respondent wrote “it’s good how it is,”
refering to the districts along Main Street
What people said about Mixed-use Development:
“There is room for multi-use everywhere and
anywhere in Bozeman.”
“Mixed use should not be put directly next to
established neighborhoods without a buffer.”
“I would like to see districts along W. Main Street
became multi-use buildings, to both relieve the
housing crisis and continue commercial development
along Main Street.”DRAFT32
30 31INTERBORO
Q1: How do you think solar panels should be
regulated in Bozeman?
• 20 responses to this question• 6 respondents think solar panels should be
incentivized• 6 respondents think solar panels regulations
should be streamlined• 5 respondents think solar panels should be
required• 3 respondents think the city should educate
people about solar panel rebates Specific
policies to remove include: don’t require lines
to be buried, get rid of setback regulations,
Specific policies to add / preserve include: height
restrictions, a soil survey, a roof inspection, runoff
study, and a requirement that cables be burried.
What people said about solar power generation:
“I think they should not be heavily regulated as they
are helpful too our city as a whole in our attempts
to be environmentally conscious. I do not think they
need to be blocked from the street because they are
generally not eyesores and are known to helpful.”
“I think that high restrictions should be in place
when built on top of a roof, since they could disturb
the mountain view so many love in Bozeman. I think
the Missoula rule of burying cords underground
is good, it makes them tidier and less invasive. I
think they should be allowed in all districts as well.
However, I think implementing the soil survey before
building soil is beneficial to ensure stability as well
as lessening the impact on the underground water
table.”
Q1: What would you like to see in a School-Oriented
Development?
• 13 responses to this question• 5 respondents underlined the importance of
connectivity: connecting roads, trails, and bike
lanes were all mentioned• 4 respondents thought that affordable housing
was a critical component • 4 respondents thought open space was a critical
component • 3 respondents mentioned mixed-use
development; 2 singled out small stores
Q2: Around what schools do you think there could be
higher density?
• 13 responses to this question• 1 respondent wrote “all of them”• 5 respondents nominated Gallatin • 2 respondents nominated the smaller elementary
schools• 1 respondent singled out Chief Joseph
What people said about School-oriented
Development:
“Elementary and middle schools; other programs
and infrastructure needs to be incorporated including
traffic calming, separated paths, walking school bus,
safe routes to school.”
“I would like School-Oriented Development near
neighborhoods so it is easy for families to get to and
from school, which will produce more walking and
less driving. Also having retail and stores, grocery
stores and food would make everything much more
livable.”
“Gallatin High School could use a higher density in
retail, as there aren’t many nearby places students
can visit at lunch.”DRAFT33
32 33INTERBORO
“I would like to see more apartments in locations
like downtown/more urban settings because they
are a more affordable and efficient option.”
“I think we should build more apartments in the more
developed neighborhoods such as the Alder Creek
neighborhood which contains mostly the same type
of housing which are suited mainly for larger families/
groups of people.”
“I would like to see more apartments,
specifically affordable housing. I want
to prevent urban sprawl and with
affordable housing, it can lower the
homeless population in Bozeman.”
“[I would like to see] affordable housing that maintains character like
condos and duplexes over apartment buildings and appropriate parking
for these housing types so streets aren’t lined with cars.”
“I would like to see more affordable townhouses
and apartments because they take up very little
space but house more people.”
“More affordable housing for employees in the central parts of
Bozeman and on the Northern Side of the highway. There should also
be more affordable housing near the schools and the Wilson”
“I would like to see open space,
small stores and a variety of different
houses to fit different family needs.”
“I would like to see more single households as
well as duplexes. I think more of these are needed
to change it up. There are SO MANY apartments
which can be hard on the eyes, if we change it up
to be less bulky and in your face, it’ll look better.”
“I would like to see more intensive development around
Story Mill Park. More
schools and places
of work around this
could prove
beneficial.”“Oak, Durston, and Rouse could all use more intensive development. And I would like to
see corridors along those streets.”
“I think more intensive development on W. Oak and Durston makes a
lot of sense because our two high schools are close to these areas.”
Common Topics Discussed:
“I would like to see districts
along W. Main Street became
multi-use buildings, to both
relieve the housing crisis and con-
tinue commercial development
along Main Street.”DRAFT34
34 35INTERBORO
There should be higher density around Gallatin High School. There is opportunity for growth and development.
School-Oriented Development
“The area around Gallatin high school is a great opportunity for school-oriented development.”
School-Oriented Development
“I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.”
School-Oriented Development
“I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development around Joe's Parkway.”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.”
School-Oriented Development
“There are too many identical 3 and 4 story apartment buildings, especially on the west side.”
Housing Diversity
“I would like to see different types of housing in the region near Chief Joesph and Gallatin High School.”Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see different types of housing closer to downtown.”
Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see different types of housing along the main street area among the older architecture.”
Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see more apartments, especially affordable housing, in fields near the hospital.”
Housing Diversity
“Specifically just north of the 19th and Graf intersection, I would like to see more variety than just apartments and condos.”
Housing Diversity
“There should be neighborhood retail in the neighborhoods behind Target / Costco / Winco.”Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“It would be good to see neighborhood retail along Rouse.”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“Our neighborhood fought a battle to keep Canyon Gate low; people don't like tall buildings here.”Height Limits
“ More height on Babcock!”
Height Limits “ More height on Mendenhall!”
Height Limits
“Don’t allow more height in Cooper Park.”
Height Limits
“I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development along Willson in South Bozeman .”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“I could see neighborhood-scale commercial development towards the south side of Bozeman: Meadow Creek and Gran Cielo neighborhoods. Since these parts of town have recently undergone development and there is still so much open space, it would be practical.”
“There should be mixed-use devel-opment near the new high school.”
School-Oriented Development
“The NE corner of Rouse and Bridger is very confined due to wetlands, highway, RR x-ings, rivers, and hills. There are not enough options for traffic to flow if it is too densly developed.”
Corner-Oriented Development
Spatial Insights:
There should be higher density around Gallatin High School. There is opportunity for growth and development.
School-Oriented Development
“The area around Gallatin high school is a great opportunity for school-oriented development.”
School-Oriented Development
“I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.”
School-Oriented Development
“I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development around Joe's Parkway.”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“I’d like to see more affordable housing built around schools.”
School-Oriented Development
“There are too many identical 3 and 4 story apartment buildings, especially on the west side.”
Housing Diversity
“I would like to see different types of housing in the region near Chief Joesph and Gallatin High School.”
Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see different types of housing closer to downtown.”
Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see different types of housing along the main street area among the older architecture.”
Housing Diversity
“I’d like to see more apartments, especially affordable housing, in fields near the hospital.”
Housing Diversity
“Specifically just north of the 19th and Graf intersection, I would like to see more variety than just apartments and condos.”
Housing Diversity
“There should be neighborhood retail in the neighborhoods behind Target / Costco / Winco.”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“It would be good to see neighborhood retail along Rouse.”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“Our neighborhood fought a battle to keep Canyon Gate low; people don't like tall buildings here.”
Height Limits
“ More height on Babcock!”
Height Limits “ More height on Mendenhall!”
Height Limits
“Don’t allow more height in Cooper Park.”
Height Limits
“I could see more Neighbor-hood-Scale Commerical development along Willson in South Bozeman .”
Neighborhood-Scale Retail
“I could see neighborhood-scale commercial development towards the south side of Bozeman: Meadow Creek and Gran Cielo neighborhoods. Since these parts of town have recently undergone development and there is still so much open space, it would be practical.”
“There should be mixed-use devel-opment near the new high school.”
School-Oriented Development
“The NE corner of Rouse and Bridger is very confined due to wetlands, highway, RR x-ings, rivers, and hills. There are not enough options for traffic to flow if it is too densly developed.”
Corner-Oriented Development
DRAFT35
36 37INTERBORO
1
B1/B2
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
BicycleInfrastructure
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
EV-ReadyInfrastructure
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
EnvironmentallySensitiveAreas
Building Our Future Together Initiative
1
Low ImpactDevelopmentStandards
Building Our Future Together Initiative
1
Planning forClimate
Change
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
Residential Office/Business
Park
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
Transitions
Building Our Future Together Initiative 1
Tree Coverage
Building Our Future Together Initiativecoming so
on!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming soon!coming s
oon!
As our next steps, we will continue to compile
responses to brochures received in person, at city
hall, and online. We will also work to develop the
following list of brochures to align with the topics that
City Commission is providing guidance on in the next
phase of the project.
B1/B2
Bicycle Infrastructure
EV-Ready Infrastructure
Environmentally Sensitive Areas
Low Impact Development (LID) Standards
Planning for Climate Change
Residential Office/Buisness Park
Transitions
Tree Converage
*This report is not a complete summary of
engagement efforts to date. More information can be
found on the overall engagement efforts that have
been undertaken in addition to the Mobile
Engagement Station and Intercept Activities at the
Engage Bozeman site: https://engage.bozeman.net
Next Steps:DRAFT36
38 INTERBOROProduced by:INTERBORO Produced for:DRAFT37